THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


Date  Due 


THE  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  THE 
CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


^Mj&^^^a^- 
'' 


..-'•'.         '         '  -J<^1,,. 

•.»•-  -       •••  •''..••     •• 

•   i'.-i    .   t  :•''••-..•':  -.-«.i    v  "•-'••-.-     '.•••• 

."'  ;:  ,•      .   ,  .  ;"   /%  . 


THE  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  THE 
CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


By 


Specialist  in  Educational  Measurements 
The  University  of  the  State  of  New  York 
The  State  Department  of  Education,  Albany 


1922 


COPYRIGHT,   1922,  BY 
WARWICK  &  YORK,   INC. 


Education 
Librarj 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

I  gratefully  acknowledge  my  indebtedness  to  many 
sources — to  members  of  boards  of  education,  to  public 
spirited  citizens,  to  superintendents,  to  other  educational 
leaders,  who  through  written  opinion  or  personal  inter- 
view contributed  to  the  thought  and  judgment  recorded 
in  this  volume.  More  particularly,  would  I  express  my 
appreciation  of  the  counsel  and  direction  given  by  Pro- 
fessor George  D.  Strayer  and  Professor  N.  L.  Engelhardt. 

J.  C.  M. 


892948 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

Chapter      I.     Statement  of  the  Problem 5 

Chapter     II.    The  Historical  Development  of  the  Office  of 

City   School   Superintendent : 9 

Traced  through  the  development  of  school 

legislation  in  two  typical  states. 

Chapter  III.  The  Legal  Status  of  the  City  School  Super- 
intendent in  the  48  States 40 

A.  The  superintendent's  relationship  as  defined 
by  law  to  the — 

a.  Board  of  education 

b.  Public 

c.  Municipal  authorities 

d.  Subordinates 

e.  County  officials 

f.  State   officials 

B.  Classification  of  powers  vested  by  law  in  the 
office  of  city  superintendent  of  schools. 

a.  Advisory 

b.  Initiatory 

c.  Independent 

C.  Summary. 

Chapter  IV.  The  Legal  Status  of  the  City  School  Super- 
intendent in  34  Representative  American 
Cities  80 

A.  Criteria  for  the  selection  of  cities. 

B.  Special  provisions  made  for  the  administra- 
tion of  city  schools. 

a.  By  State  legislatures  for  cities  of  the 
first     class      (usually     only     one     city 
affected) 

b.  By  city  councils  or  commissions  when 
given    such    power    by    legislative    or 
constitutional  enactment. 

Chapter  V.  The  Judgment  of  Lay  and  Professional 
Leaders  of  Education  as  to  the  Legal  Status 
that  Should  be  Given  to  the  City  School 
Superintendent  99 


Chapter  VI.     Principles  of   Government  Involved  in   City 

School    Administration 124 

a.  The  public  interest  or  welfare  the  chief 
factor. 

b.  The  need  for  centralized  responsibility 
in  administering  school  affairs. 

c.  Provisions  for  eliminating  dual  control. 

d.  The  value  of  clearly  defining  the  powers 
and  duties  of   school  officials. 

A  Brief  of  a  Proposed  Legal  Status  for  the  City  School 

Superintendent    151 

Appendix    157 

a.  Charts  showing  the  legal  status  of  the 
city    school    superintendent    in, 

a.  The  48  states. 

b.  Cities      operating      under      special 
charters. 

b.  Statistical  tables. 

(Inserted   in  pocket  in   back  of  book.) 

Bibliography  160 


CHAPTER  I 
THE  PROBLEM 

The  1918  census  report  oFFinancial  Statistics  of  Cities 
stated  that  the  227  cities  above  30,000  population  con- 
tained 34,000,000  people  or  32.9  per  cent,  of  the  estimated 
population  of  the  country.  The  same  report  also  stated 
that  31.4  per  cent,  of  the  entire  expenditure  of  this  group 
of  cities  was  for  schools.  That  this  was  a  considerable 
increase  over  the  preceding  decade  is  indicated  in  the  fol- 
lowing figures : 

1907      1911      1915      1918 
Per  cent,  of  total  city  expense 

devoted  to  schools 27.7       28.6       30.2       31.4 

Cost  of  Schools  per  capita. .  .$4.42    $5.04    $5.58    $6.28 

If  in  addition  to  the  227  cities  mentioned  above,  the 
expenditure  for  schools  made  by  the  1,200  odd  cities 
with  population  of  from  5,000  to  30,000  is  taken  into  con- 
sideration, the  immensity  of  the  problem  of  city  school 
administration,  merely  from  the  business  standpoint,  be- 
comes apparent.  The  widespread  demand  for  better 
qualified  teachers,  for  better  school  buildings  and  equip- 
ment, and  for  better  exercise  by  the  school  authorities 
of  nearly  all  functions  that  have  been  delegated  to  the 
schools  promise  that  the  cost  of  schools  will  not  diminish, 
but  will  of  necessity  considerably  increase  during  the  next 
several  years. 

Under  the  stress  of  changing  economic  and  social  con- 
ditions the  American  people  are  exceedingly  interested 
not  only  in  the  expenditure  of  money  for  schools  but 

5 


6         LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

particularly  in  the  results  that  are  and  will  be  obtained. 
As  taxes  increase  and,  as  an  ever  larger  proportion  of  ex- 
penditure goes  for  school  purposes,  the  pressure  on  school 
administrative  officials  will  increase  and  the  demand  for 
better  results  will  be  greater  and  ott  times  unreasoning. 
Accompanying  this  pressure  and  unrest  will  come  a  de- 
mand for  change,  for  the  trying  of  many  and  varied  ex- 
periments— all  of  which  will  be  merely  outward  signs 
of  an  underlying  sense  of  need  for  such  a  reorganization 
of  the  school  administrative  machinery  as  will  definitely 
fix  responsibility  and  so  produce  the  most  and  best  re- 
turns on  the  investment.  On  those  responsible  for  the 
administration  of  schools  will  largely  fall  the  problem 
of  reorganization. 

Today  the  typical  American  city  school  system  is  con- 
trolled by  a  board  of  education,  elected  by  the  people : 
the  board  appoints  an  executive  or  administrative  officer, 
the  superintendent,  who  is  largely  or  altogether  subject 
to  the  will  of  the  board.  From  this  general  type  there 
are  many  variations — all  of  them  results  of  the  operation 
of  certain  different  but  fundamental  theories  relative  to 
city  school  administration. 

The  first  of  these  theories  is  in  some  sense  a  develop- 
ment from  the  spirit  of  the  New  England  town  meeting. 
In  a  present  day  and  professionalized  terminology  it  is 
embodied  in  the  theory  of  "municipal  home  rule."  In 
the  educational  field,  it  practically  considers  the  city  dis- 
trict as  the  chief  if  not  sole  authority  over  all  questions 
concerning  the  local  administration  of  schools.  It  as- 
sumes that  the  powers  of  administration  are  derived  from 
the  electorate  and  should  be  legally  vested  in  officers 
whom  the  electorate  may  reach  with  their  ballots.  The 
logical  sequence  of  this  theory  is  that  the  executive  head 
of  the  school  should  be  an  employee  of  the  board  of  edu- 
cation with  only  such  powers  and  duties  as  the  board 


STATEMENT    OF    THE    PROBLEM  7 

may  delegate  to  him ;  and  with  the  privilege  of  exercising 
such  powers  and  performing  such  duties  only  in  so  long 
as  it  may  suit  the  pleasure  of  the  board. 

An  entirely  different  theory  stresses  the  fact  that  edu- 
cation is  a  function  of  the  State ;  and  that,  therefore,  the 
State  should  make  such  provision  for  the  local  adminis- 
tration of  schools  as  will  best  promote  the  interests  of  the 
State.  It  considers  the  city  superintendent  an  official  of 
the  State,  responsible  for  the  administration  of  schools 
in  a  convenient  subdivision  of  the  larger  unit.  The  cen- 
tralized authority  determines  the  qualifications  necessary 
for  the  office,  appoints  and  removes  the  individual  official, 
pays  his  salary  and  supervises  or  directs  his  activities 
while  in  office.  This  theory,  when  it  grants  the  local 
community  any  voice  at  all  in  the  conduct  of  its  local 
school  affairs,  either  delegates  certain  specific  functions 
to  certain  civil  authorities  of  the  city,  or  creates  a  local 
board  of  education  which  operates  primarily  in  an  ad- 
visory capacity. 

Between  these  two  theories,  there  is  developing  a  third 
theory  that  attempts  to  coordinate  the  essential  features 
of  them  both.  It  recognizes  the  value  of  local  initiative 
and  local  responsibility ;  it  believes  that  the  people  of  a 
city  should  be  made  to  feel  responsible  for  producing  a 
school  system  superior  to  the  minimum  that  the  State 
can  require ;  and  that  to  secure  the  full  value  of  this  local 
initiative  the  city  must  have  a  large  control  through  its 
elective  officials  of  the  administration  of  its  schools.  On 
the  other  hand  this  theory  recognizes  the  right  of  the 
people  of  a  State  to  establish  minimum  requirements  for 
the  good  of  all  the  children ;  and  it  denies  the  right  of  a 
local  community  to  fall  below  these  minimum  standards. 
It  recognizes  the  ever-increasing  complexity  of  a  modern 
city  school  system  and  the  need  of  professionally  trained 


8         LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

leadership  in  the  administration  of  such  school  systems. 
To  secure  such  leadership,  this  theory  accepts  the  right 
of  the  State  to  determine  the  qualifications  necessary  for 
filling  the  local  office,  to  pass  upon  the  fitness  of  the  in- 
dividual for  that  office,  to  specify  certain  of  his  duties 
while  in  office,  to  supervise  many  of  his  activities  and  to 
protect  in  some  measure  his  tenure  during  the  term  of 
his  contract.  Outside  of  these  specified  limits  the  locally 
elected  or  appointed  board  has  full  control  of  local  affairs. 

It  is  with  an  examination  and  evaluation  of  these  three 
fundamental  theories  in  their  application  to  city  school 
administration  that  this  study  is  concerned.  Their  ex- 
pression in  the  law  admits  of  varied  and  complicated 
relationships — the  relationships  of  public  and  board  of 
education ;  board  of  education  and  other  civil  authorities ; 
board  of  education  and  superintendent;  superintendent 
and  other  executive  officers ;  executive  officers  and  teach- 
ers; board  of  education  and  superintendent  to  State 
authorities,  and  so  on.  While  it  is  necessary  to  consider 
all  of  these  problems  in  searching  for  the  best  legal 
organization  of  city  school  administration,  it  is  the  super- 
intendent and  board  of  education  that  the  American 
people  will  hold  responsible  for  satisfactory  returns  from 
their  investment  in  the  public  schools.  The  relationship 
between  these  two  agents  of  the  people  and  their  specific 
responsibilities  in  the  law,  then,  constitute  the  problem 
for  this  study. 

The  conclusions  reached  should  result  from  considera- 
tion of  the  historical  development  of  the  problem,  of  the 
school  laws  now  in  force  as  set  forth  in  state  codes  and 
city  charters,  of  the  principles  and  practices  that  have 
evolved  in  municipal  administration,  and  of  the  best 
judgment  of  lay  and  professional  leaders  in  school  ad- 
ministration. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE    HISTORICAL    DEVELOPMENT    OF    THE 
OFFICE  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

The  city  school  superintendent  is  a  product  of  many 
experiments.  A  pioneer  people  were  confronted  with 
the  building  of  an  educational  system.  At  every  turn 
they  felt  the  need  of  improving  their  school  facilities,  and 
of  having  some  agency  in  each  governmental  unit  that 
they  might  hold  responsible  for  bringing  about  such  im- 
provement. Certain  ideas  were  gleaned  through  their 
leaders1  from  the  educational  systems  of  the  parent  lands, 
and,  for  the  rest,  they  used  whatever  agency  seemed  best 
suited  to  their  purpose.  After  a  century  or  more  of  trial 
and  error,  of  conflict  between  ideals  as  widely  contrasted 
as  the  highly  centralized  educational  system  of  France 
and  the  New  England  town  meeting,  there  has  been 
crystalized  the  office  of  city  school  superintendent  which 
is  fairly  definite  in  its  concept,  and  common  to  the  edu- 
cational systems  in  all  the  states. 

Since  the  development  of  the  office  in  Connecticut  and 
in  Ohio  has  been  typical  in  a  large  measure  of  its  devel- 
opment throughout  the  country,  the  school  legislation  of 
these  two  states  is  taken  as  the  basis  of  this  chapter 
Ohio  through  its  mass  and  variety  of  special,  city  charter 
legislation  from  1829  to  about  1870  and  again  under 
the  guise  of  legislation  for  grades  of  cities  from  1875  to 
1904  seems  to  have  tried  in  some  city  or  another  nearly 
every  type  of  school  administration  that  the  American 

•Ho.vt  &  Ford,  TAje  of  John  D.  Pierce,  pages  81-82. 
Barnard,  The  Old  Hartford  flrammar  School,  page  233. 


IO      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

mind  has  conceived ;  and  as  a  result  of  such  experimenta- 
tion has  from  time  to  time  reduced  the  principles  thus 
tried  to  general  legislation  applicable  to  all  of  its  cities. 

Connecticut,  in  some  sense,  the  co-parent  of  the  free 
public  school  system  of  America,  through  one  hundred 
fifty  years  of  experiment,  evolved  the  concept  of  public 
duty  and  responsibility  embodied  in  the  office  of  school 
visitor,  an  office  that  has  gradually  developed  through 
another  century  into  that  of  city  school  superintendent. 

CONNECTICUT  GENERAL  SCHOOL  LEGISLATION 

In  1650  the  General  Court  of  the  colony  of  Connecticut 
enacted  a  "body  of  laws."  Among  the  provisions  for  edu- 
cation is  to  be  found  the  following: 

For  as  much  as  the  good  education  of  children  is  of 
singular  behoof  and  benefit  to  any  commonwealth  and 
whereas  many  parents  and  masters  are  too  .indulgent 
and  negligent  of  their  duty  in  that  kind : 
It  is  therefore  ordered  by  this  court  and  the  authority 
thereof,  that  the  selectmen  of  every  town  in  the  several 
precincts  and  quarters  where  they  dwell,  shall  have  a 
vigilant  eye  over  their  brethren  and  neighbors,  to  see, 
first,  that  none  of  them  shall  suffer  so  much  barbarism 
in  any  of  their  families,  as  not  to  endeavor  to  teach,  by 
themselves  or  others,  their  children  and  apprentices  so 
much  learning  as  may  enable  them  perfectly  to  read 
the  English  tongue  and  knowledge  of  the  capital  laws, 


Apparently  in  this  early  day,  those  who  framed  the 
law  realized  the  need  of  having  some  one  responsible  for 
seeing  that  the  law  should  be  enforced.  This  responsi- 
bility was  given  to  the  selectmen  of  the  "several  precincts 
and  quarters;"  and  further  provisions  of  the  law  gave 
the  selectmen  ample  authority  to  examine  the  children  and 
to  enforce  the  law.  The  actual  result  of  the  above  provi- 

'Barnard,  Old  Hartford  School,  p.  171.. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  of  THE  OFFICE  II 

sion  of  the  1650  code  may  be  surmised  from  the  following, 
enacted  in  1690: 

This  court  observing  that,  notwithstanding  the  for- 
mer orders  made  for  the  education  of  children  and  ser- 
vants, there  are  many  persons  unable  to  read  the  Eng- 
lish tongue,  and  thereby  unable  to  read  the  holy  word 
of  God  and  the  good  laws  of  this  colony,  it  is  hereby 
ordained  that  all  parents  and  masters  shall  cause  their 
children  and  servants,  as  they  are  capable,  to  read  dis- 
tinctly the  English  tongue,  and  that  the  grand  jury- 
men in  each  town  do,  once  in  a  year,  at  least,  visit  each 
family  they  suspect  to  neglect  this  order,  and  satisfy 
themselves  that  all  children  under  age,  and  servants  in 
such  suspected  families,  can  read  well  the  English 
tongue  or  in  good  procedure  to  learn  the  same  or  not, 
and  if  they  find  any  such  children  or  servants  not 
taught  as  their  years  are  capable  of,  they  shall  return 
the  names  of  the  parents  or  masters  of  the  said  chil- 
dren, to  the  next  county  court,  when  the  said  parents 
or  masters  shall  be  fined  twenty  shillings  for  each 
child  or  servant  whose  teaching  is  thus  neglected  ac- 
cording to  this  order.1 

Here  again,  the  colonial  legislature  reiterated  the  right 
of  the  State  to  enforce  the  education  of  the  children  of 
the  State ;  but,  having  become  dissatisfied  with  the  results 
obtained  by  the  selectmen  in  their  forty  years  trial,  placed 
the  responsibility  for  the  local  administration  or  super- 
vision of  the  law  in  the  hands  of  the  grand  jurymen. 

A  third  scheme  for  placing  responsibility  for  the  over- 
sight of  schools  is  indicated  in  an  act  of  the  court  in  1690*. 
This  court  considering  the  necessary  and  great  ad- 
vantage of  good  literature,  do  order  and  appoint  that 
there  shall  be  two  good  free  schools  kept  and  main- 
tained in  this  colony   for  the   schooling  of  all   such 
children  as  shall  come  there  after  they  can  distinctly 
read  the  psalter,  to  be  taught  reading,  writing,  arith- 

'Barnard,  Old  Hartford  School,  p.  171. 


12      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

metic,  Hie  Latin  and  English  languages — the  one  at 
Hartford  and  the  other  at  New  Haven — the  masters 
whereof  shall  be  chosen  by  the  magistrates  and  minis- 
ters of  the  said  counties,  and  shall  be  inspected  and 

displaced  by  them  if  they  see  cause ' 

What  seems  to  have  been  the  forerunner  of  the  board 
of  education  is  suggested  in  the  appointment  of  a  com- 
mittee by  vote  of  the  town  of  Hartford  in  1664.  This 
committee  was  to  be  responsible  for  the  administration 
of  a  portion  of  an  estate  bequeathed  by  Governor  Hopkins 
for  school  purposes.  The  record  of  the  vote  reads  that 
the  committee  "are  desired  and  empowered  to  employ 
that  said  sume — according  to  such  instructions  as  shall 
be  given  them  by  this  town  or  for  want  of,  according  to 
their  own  discretions."1 

Apparently  the  sole  duty  of  this  committee  was  the 
administration  of  the  estate,  or  the  business  interests  of 
the  school  fund.  As  late  as  1749  the  committee  was  men- 
tioned in  the  record  of  the  town  as  the  "school  commit- 
tee," but  the  record  quoted  gives  no  intimation  that  the 
committee  had  any  authority  except  as  to  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  proceeds  of  the  estate  bequeathed  nearly 
a  hundred  years  before,  and  of  such  other  funds  as  had 
been  added. 

In  1753  the  so-called  Free  School  was  changed  to  a 
Grammar  School,  a  committee  was  appointed  "to  take 
into  their  hands  and  care,  the  said  lands  and  moneys 
and  all  the  interests  appertaining  to  the  said  school,  and 
apply  the  profits  and  incomes  from  the  same  to  the  setting 
up,  maintaining  and  supporting  of  a  Grammar  School 
as  aforesaid;  and  the  said  committee  are  to  have  and 
take  the  care,  charge,  and  oversight  of  the  said  Gram- 
mar School,  and  make  and  give  such  general  orders  as 

'Barnard.   Old  Hartford  School,  p.    187. 
•Ibid,  p.  176. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  13 

they  shall  think  best  for  the  well  ordering  and  managing 
said  school."1 

In  the  above  statement  we  see  probably  the  first  at- 
tempt to  make  a  committee  or  board  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple of  the  community  responsible  for  the  "care,  charge, 
and  oversight"  of  all  the  interests  of  the  school.  Judg- 
ing from  the  records  quoted  by  Mr.  Barnard,  this  was 
a  period  when  the  people  of  Hartford  were  desirous  of 
improving  their  school,  and  their  attempts  toward  im- 
provement were  marked  by  their  placing  greater  respon- 
sibility on  their  school  committee.  The  following  record 
expresses  very  clearly  the  relationship  that  the  people 
intended  should  exist  between  their  committee  and  the 
"master  or  masters"  of  their  school. 

1765,  Dec.  30 — it  is  therefore  voted  that  George 
Willys,  Samuel  Talcott,  and  William  Pitkin,  Jr.,  Esqs., 
or  the  major  part  of  them,  be  and  they  are  hereby 
appointed  a  committee  in  the  room  of  the  former  com- 
mittee, to  hire  a  schoolmaster,  and  to  take  into  their 
care  all  the  interests,  moneys,  and  securities  belong- 
ing to  said  school,  and  to  manage,  regulate  and  order 
the  same  for  the  best  advantage  thereof.  That  the 
said  committee  for  the  time  being,  do  give  written 
instructions  to  the  master  or  masters  that  shall  be 
employed  to  keep  or  teach  in  said  school  with  regard 
to  the  rules  he  shall  observe: — The  method  of  teach- 
ing and  admitting  of  scholars  into  the  same ;  and  it  is 
especially  recommended  that  such  masters  be  instructed 
to  take  due  care  of  the  morals,  as  well  as  of  the  learn- 
ing of  the  scholars * 

In  1766  this  school  committee  was  increased  to  six 
members  and  enjoined  to  "devise  some  method  for  the 
better  regulating  of  the  Grammar  School,  and  lay  the 
same  before  the  next  meeting  of  the  town  in  order  for 


'Barnard.    Old  Hartford  School,  p.   191. 
"Barnard.  Old  Hartford  School,  p.  190. 


14      tECAL  STATUS  Of  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

their  approbation."  A  year  later  the  committee  reported 
it  as  their  "opinion,  that  the  following  things  and  regu- 
lations are  still  further  necessary  in  order  to  the  pro- 
moting and  advancing  good  literature  and  the  interests 

belonging  to  said  school, " 

The  first  four  recommendations  concerned  the  busi- 
ness or  financial  interests  of  the  districts.  The  remainder 
of  the  recommendations  are  of  peculiar  interest  in  that 
they  show  the  need  felt  by  the  committee  for  a  more 
thorough  oversight  of  the  instructional  activities  of  the 
school,  and  of  the  relation  between  the  instructional 
activity  and  suitable  building  accommodations.1  The 
fifth  and  sixth  clauses  follow: — 

Fifth — That  said  committee,  as  soon  as  may  be,  use 
their  utmost  endeavors  to  obtain  some  meet  person, 
duly  qualified  to  undertake  the  keeping  of  said  school, 
and  to  settle  therein;  and  for  that  purpose,  if  need 
be,  to  make  such  alterations,  or  erect  and  make  such 
additions  to  the  buildings  belonging  to  said  school  as 
will  best  serve  and  promote  the  good  ends  and  de- 
signs of  the  same. 

Sixth — That  said  committee,  from  time  to  time, 
give  directions  and  prescribe  rules  to  the  master  for 
the  well  ordering  of  said  school;  that  they  inspect  and 
visit  the  same  at  least  every  quarter  of  each  year,  and 
hear  and  attend  the  exercises  and  performance  of  the 
youths  belonging  to  said  school,  on  said  quarter  days, 
and  desire  some  or  all  the  ministers  of  said  town  for 
the  time  being,  to  visit,  assist,  advise,  and  consult  the 
best  measures  for  the  advancement  of  good  literature 
in  said  school;  and  said  committee,  or  the  major  part 
of  them,  do  determine  concerning  the  admission  and 

number  of  scholars  proper  for  said  school. ... 

In  1789  the  committee  was  reorganized  by  adding  the 
pastors  of  the  several  churches  in  Hartford.1  In  the 

'Barnard,  Old  Hartford  School,  p.   192. 
'Barnard,  Old  Hartford  School,  p.  193. 


record  of  the  first  meeting  of  the  reorganized  committee 
we  have  a  beginning  of  what  is  now  known  as  the  com- 
mittee system  of  school  board  organization.  One  com- 
mittee of  three  was  appointed  to  examine  the  funds,  ac- 
counts, and  securities,  to  take  such  measures  as  might 
be  necessary  and  to  report  back  to  the  board.  A  second 
committee  was  "to  digest  a  system  of  Rules  and  Regu- 
lations for  the  government  of  said  school,  and  lay  the 
same  before  said  trustees  at  their  next  meeting."  The 
third  committee  was  "to  examine  candidates"  for  ad- 
mission, and  for  "examining  Sd  school  monthly.'  "  At 
this  same  meeting,  the  board  selected  a  chairman,  regis- 
ter, and  treasurer.  The  records  of  the  board  give  ac- 
count of  two  examinations.  The  report  of  the  committee 
on  rules  and  regulations  was  made  and  adopted  January 
6th,  1790.  In  1798  the  Board  of  Trustees  was  incor- 
porated by  the  General  Assembly  "under  the  name  of  the 
Trustees  of  the  Grammar  School  in  the  town  of  Hart- 
ford." 

About  this  time  (1795)  the  schools  of  the  State  were 
given  over  to  ecclesiastical  societies  known  as  School 
Societies ;  and  the  general  assembly  created  a  new  group 
.of  officers  whose  sole  official  responsibility  was  the  wel- 
fare of  the  schools.  The  outstanding  feature  of  this 
legislative  action  was  the  creation  in  each  school  society 
of  a  board  of  school  visitors.  The  effect  of  this  change 
of  responsibility  for  the  admnistration  ;of  schools  is 
described  in  the  following  extract  from  Mr.  Barnard's 
report  to  the  Board  of  Common  Schools  in  1842. 

Prior  to  1798,  these  powers  and  duties  devolved  on 
the  civil  authority  and  select-men  of  each  town,  but 
in  the  revision  of  the  school  law,  in  that  year,  they 
were  transferred  to  a  distinct  class  of  officers,  denom- 
inated visitors,  or  overseers  of  schools,  elected  by  each 
society,  and  charged  exclusively  with  them.  This 


l6      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

change  proved  highly  advantageous,  for  some  time,  but 
from  the  want  of  a  more  specific  enumeration,  and 
some  modification  of  their  powers,  to  adapt  them  to  the 
altered  circumstances  of  the  schools,  and  of  society, 
the  great  object  of  their  appointment  from  year  to  year 
in  a  measure  failed.  When  first  appointed,  the  com- 
mon school  was  the  main  reliance  of  all  classes,  for 
the  elementary  education  of  children,  and  there  was, 
therefore,  connected  with  the  discharge  of  their  duties, 
strong  parental,  as  well  as  the  ordinary  official,  and 
benevolent  interest.  The  number  of  districts  were 
not  as  large,  the  schools  were  kept  for  only  one  portion 
of  the  year,  and  the  same  teachers  continued  in  the 
employment  and  in  the  same  district,  for  a  longer  time ; 
a  change  in  these  particulars  has  more  than  doubled 
the  demands  on  the  time  and  attention  of  school  visi- 
tors    Formerly  there  was  a  high  degree  of 

public  consideration  attached  to  this  office,  as  well 
as  a  lively  interest  in  all  that  concerned  the  administra- 
tion of  the  school  system.  The  result  of  the  whole 
was  ascertained  to  be,  that  the  mode  of  discharging  the 
duties  of  inspection  and  superintendence,  which  is  the 
very  life  of  a  school  system,  and  determines,  in  a  great 
measure,  the  character  of  the  schools,  was  inefficient, 
irregular,  and  formal  at  best.  To  remedy  these  de- 
fects and  irregularities,  the  powers  and  duties  of  school 
visitors  are  more  distinctly  defined  in  the  act  of  1839. 
First — They  may  prescribe  rules  and  regulations 
respecting  the  studies,  books,  classification  and  disci- 
pline of  the  schools. 

Secondly — They  must  withhold  a  certificate  from 
such  persons  as  are  not  found  qualified  to  teach  certain 
specified  branches,  and  annul  the  certificates  of  such 
as  shall  prove,  on  trial,  to  be  unqualified  and  unfaith- 
ful  

Thirdly — They  must  visit  all  the  common  schools 
at  least  twice  during  each  season  of  schooling. 


HISTORICAL   DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  17 

One  of  these  visits  must  be  made  near  the  beginning 
of  the  term,  and  the  other  near  the  close,  so  that  a 
right  direction  can  be  given  to  the  school,  and  the 

final  progress  be  judged  of 

Fourthly — They  can  appoint  a  committee  of  one  or 
two  persons,  to  exercise  all  the  powers,  and  perform 
all  the  duties  of  the  whole  board,  under  their  advice 
and  direction,  and  receive  one  dollar  a  day  for  the 

time    actually   employed    

Fifthly — They  must  prepare,  when  required  by  this 
Board,  and  annually  for  their  several  societies,  a  writ- 
ten report  as  to  the  condition  of  the  schools,  and  plans 

and  suggestions  for  their  improvement * 

In  1840  Mr.  Barnard  became  a  member  of  the  Board 
of  School  Visitors  of  Hartford  and  prepared  a  plan  for 
the  reorganization  of  the  school  districts  of  that  city. 
In  the  third  clause  of  the  plan  he  stated  clearly  what  he 
believed  to  be  the  proper  organization  and  duties  of  the 
board  of  education  and  superintendent. 

The  studies,  books,  discipline  and  supervision  of  the 
schools,  and  the  management  of  the  property  and 
concerns  of  the  district,  are  to  be  intrusted  to  a  Board, 
two-thirds  of  whom  shall  be  elected  annually,  and  the 
other  third  hold  over.  It  is  also  proposed,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  giving  efficiency  to  the  action  of  the  Board, 
that  they  elect  a  superintendent  who  shall  visit  the 
schools,  employ  the  teachers,  meet  with  them  for  in- 
struction, visit  the  parents  and  guardians  of  such  chil- 
dren as  are  not  sent  to  school  at  all,  or  attend  irre- 
gularly, see  to  the  repairs  and  management  of  the 
schoolhouses ;  in  fine,  to  devote  his  whole  time  to  the 
prosperity  of  the  schools.* 

The  plan  was  not  adopted  in  Hartford ;  but  it  was  the 
essence  of  the  scheme  for  city  school  organization 
which  was  widely  advocated  by  Mr.  Barnard  in  his 

tFourth    Annual   Report    of   the    Board    of    Commissioners    of    Common 

Schools  in  Connecticut,  Hartford,  1842.  pp.  43-47. 
'Barnard,  Old  Hartford  School,  p.  240. 


i8 


writings  and  public  addresses.  It  is  of  interest  to  us  now 
because  its  principal  features  were  later  written  into  the 
laws  of  many  states  and  particularly  into  special  city 
charters.  In  1871  Mr.  Barnard  wrote: 

I  have  lived  long  enough  to  see  clearly  all  the  car- 
dinal features  of  city  and  State  school  organization 
advocated  in  this  city  from  1838  to  1842,  and  denounced 
"as  the  impracticable  schemes  of  an  enthusiast,"  in- 
grafted into  the  constitutions  of  fifteen  States,  and  the 
school  systems  of  thirty-five  States,  and  upwards  of 
one  hundred  cities  including  all  having  over  forty 
thousand  inhabitants,  and  many  more  with  a  smaller 
population.1 

The  following  extracts  are  taken  directly  from  the 
revised  "Act  concerning  Common  Schools"  of  1841 :  they 
show  the  provision  made  by  the  General  Assembly  for 
the  local  administration  and  supervision  of  schools. 

SCHOOL  LAWS,   CONN.    184!. 

Page  4,  Section  3.  Every  school  society  at  the  an- 
nual meeting  shall  choose  a  clerk,  a  school  committee 
of  one  or  three  persons,  a  board  of  school  visitors,  not 
exceeding  nine  persons,  a  treasurer  and  a  collector, 
who  shall  hold  their  respective  offices  until  the  next 
annual  meeting,  and  until  others  are  chosen  or  ap- 
pointed. 

Page  5,  Section  5.  The  school  committee  shall  have 
the  care  and  management  of  any  property  or  funds  be- 
longing to  the  society,  and  shall  lodge  all  bonds,  leases, 
notes  and  other  securities,  with  the  treasurer,  except 
so  far  as  the  same  has  been,  or  shall  be,  entrusted  to 
.  others  by  the  donor  or  grantor,  or  by  the  General  As- 
sembly, or  by  the  society. 

They  shall  pay  to  the  treasurer  all  money  which 
they  may  collect  and  receive  for  the  use  of  schools ; 

They  shall  settle  and  describe  the  boundary  lines  of 
any  new  school  district,  or  of  any  existing  district,  or 

•Barnard,    Old  Hartford  School,  p.   241. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  IQ 

parts  of  a  district  within  their  limits,  where  the  lines 
are  not  now  settled  and  described,  when  applied  to  by 
the  district,  and  shall  cause  the  same  to  be  entered  on 
the  records  of  the  society. 

They  shall  designate  the  time,  place,  and  object  of 
holding  the  first  meeting  of  any  new  district ; 

They  shall  give  due  notice  of  all  meetings  of  the 
society ; 

They  shall  make  return  of  the  number  of  persons 
over  four,  and  under  sixteen  years  of  age  in  said 
society,  to  the  Comptroller,  and  draw  orders  on  the 
same  for  any  portion  of  public  money  due  to  said  so- 
ciety, as  hereinafter  prescribed; 

They  shall  draw  all  orders  on  the  treasurer  of  the 
society,  and  perform  all  other  lawful  acts  which  may 
be  required  of  them  by  society,  or  which  may  te 
necessary  to  carry  into  full  effect  the  powers  of  the 
school  societies. 

Pages  6  and  7,  Section  8.  The  Board  of  Visitors 
shall  prescribe  rules  and  regulations  for  the  manage- 
ment, studies,  books,  classification  and  discipline  of 
the  schools  in  the  society; 

Shall  themselves,  or  by  a  committee,  by  them  ap- 
pointed for  this  purpose,  examine  all  candidates  as 
teachers  in  the  common  schools  of  such  society,  and 
shall  give  to  those  persons  with  whose  moral  charac- 
ter, literary  attainments,  and  ability  to  teach  they  are 
satisfied,  a  certificate  setting  forth  the  branches  he  or 
she  is  capable  of  teaching:  Provided,  that  no  certifi- 
cate shall  be  given  to  any  person  not  found  qualified  to 
teach  reading,  writing,  arithmetic  and  grammar  thor- 
oughly, and  the  rudiments  of  geography  and  history; 
.  Shall  visit  all  the  common  schools  of  said  society 
twice  at  least  during  each  season  for  schooling,  once 
within  four  weeks  after  the  opening,  and  again  within 
four  weeks  preceding  the  close  of  the  school,  at  which 
visits  they  shall  examine  the  register  of  the  teacher, 
and  other  matters  touching  the  schoolhouse,  library, 


2O      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

studies,  discipline,  mode  of  teaching,  and  improvement 
of  the  school; 

Shall  annul  by  a  major  vote  of  said  visitors,  the  cer- 
tificates of  such  teachers  as  shall  be  found  unqualified, 
or  who  will  not  conform  to  the  law  and  the  regula- 
tions adopted  by  the  visitors; 

Shall  make  out  returns  of  the  condition  of  each  com- 
mon school  within  their  limits,  in  such  particulars,  and 
at  such  time,  as  the  board  of  commissioners  of  com- 
mon schools  may  specify  and  direct ; 

And  shall  submit  to  the  society  at  their  annual  meet- 
ing a  written  account  of  their  own  doings,  and  of  the 
condition  of  the  several  schools  within  their  limits  for 
the  year  preceding. 

The  board  of  visitors  may  appoint  a  committee  of 
one  or  two  persons,  to  exercise  all  the  powers,  and 
perform  all  the  duties  of  said  visitor,  subject  to  their 
rules  and  regulations ;  and  such  committee  shall  receive 
one  dollar  each  per  day  for  the  time  actually  employed 
in  performing  said  duties,  and  such  other  compensa- 
tion as  the  society  may  direct,  to  be  paid  out  of  the  in- 
come of  the  town  deposit  fund,  or  in  any  other  way 
which  said  society  may  provide. 

The  foregoing  extracts  mark  three  distinct  phases  in 
the  development  of  the  law  concerning  local  school  ad- 
ministration:  (i)  a  dual  control,  with  a  school  com- 
mittee responsible  for  the  financial  or  physical  aspects 
of  school  affairs  and  a  board  of  school  visitors  respon- 
sible for  the  instructional  activities;  (2)  a  detailed 
enumeration  of  the  powers  and  duties  of  both  the  com- 
mittee and  board;  and  (3)  a  greater  emphasis  upon  cer- 
tification of  teachers  and  supervision.  The  law  was  a 
forward  step  and  was  subject  to  much  opposition  during 
the  next  decade ;  but  the  agitation  for  better  school  laws 
continued  and  in  1855  tne  General  Assembly  directed  the 
Trustees  of  the  State  Normal  School  "to  appoint  a  Com- 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  21 

mittee  of  three  from  their  number  to  consider,  during  the 
recess  of  the  General  Assembly,  the  existing  School 
Laws,  with  a  view  to  their  revision  and  simplification.  .'" 

This  committee  prepared  a  draft  of  a  revised  law  and 
submitted  it  to  School  Visitors  and  other  friends  of  edu- 
cation throughout  the  state  for  their  criticism.  Among 
other  things,  they  recommended  that  the  management 
of  the  school  affairs  be  restored  again  to  the  towns ;  that 
a  board  of  three,  six  or  nine  school  visitors  be  elected  to 
hold  office  three  years,  one-third  being  elected  each  year ; 
that  this  board  perform  all  the  duties  heretofore  per- 
formed by  the  School  Committee  and  Board  of  Visitors; 
that  the  board  elect  an  Acting  Visitor  or  Town  Superin- 
tendent; and  that  teachers  should  be  examined  by  a  ma- 
jority of  the  Board  or  by  the  town  superintendent. 

They  further  suggested  the  desirability  of  permitting 
the  Board  of  Visitors  to  elect  one  outside  their  own  num- 
ber "even  a  non»resident  of  the  town"  as  superintendent. 

This  proposed  revision  of  the  school  law  resulted  in  a 
new  series  of  school  legislation  begining  with  the  Act 
of  1856  which  transferred  to  Towns  the  duties  and  pow- 
ers of  School  Societies  with  regard  to  schools/  The 
school  committee  of  certain  districts  organized  under 
the  Act  of  1855  was  changed  to  a  "board  of  education 
consisting  of  three,  six  or  nine  persons."3  To  this  board 
was  delegated  most  of  the  powers  which  to  that  time 
had  belonged  to  the  board  of  visitors.  Three  years  later 
the  law  was  amended  to  give  the  board  of  education  all 
the  powers  and  duties  belonging  to  the  boards  of  school 
visitors,4  one  of  which  was  the  "full  power  to  appoint  an 


^Circular  concemina:  Alterations  in  the  School  Laws  to  School  Visitors 

and  Others,  1856. 
'Public    Acts    relating    to    Common    Schools   in    force    in    the    State    ofl 

Conn.   1860. 

•Ibid.     "17  Sec.  10."  p.  10. 
4Ibid,  1858,  21,  Sec.  1,  p.  12. 


22      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

acting  school  visitor  in  said  district,  who  shall  possess 
within  said  district  all  the  powers,  and  be  subject  to  all 
the  duties  by  law  possessed  by  and  imposed  upon  similar 
/officers  appointed  by  the  board  of  school  visitors  of  the 
several  towns."*  The  powers  and  duties  of  the  board  of 
school  visitors  were  restricted  to  the  "remaining  portion 
of  said  town."7  However,  for  those  towns  which  were 
single  districts  or  which  had  school  obligations  outside  of 
special  districts  within  their  borders  there  was  a  sharp 
division  of  authority8 — roughly  speaking,  all  responsibility 
for  instructional  activity  was  lodged  in  the  board  of 
school  visitors,  and  the  care  and  management  of  any 
property  or  funds  "was  vested  in  the  town  selectmen." 

A  redraft  of  the  law  in  1860  sets  forth  the  dual  respon- 
sibility for  school  supervision  very  clearly  and  is  of  pe- 
culiar interest  because  it  defines  more  definitely  the  duties 
of  the  acting  school  visitor  of  the  town.  The  law  pro- 
vided that  any  town  which  included  ten  or  more  school 
districts  within  its  limits  might  "appoint  a  sub-committee 
of  one  or  more  persons,  of  their  number,  to  visit  the 
schools."  The  duties  of  this  sub-committee  were  defined 
thus: 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  acting  school  visitor  or 
visitors  of  every  town,  to  visit  every  common  school  in 
said  town  in  company  with  one  of  the  visitors,  or  of 
the  district  committee,  if  such  attendance  can  be  ob- 
tained; and  such  visits  shall  be  made  twice  at  least 
during  each  session  of  schooling,  in  conformity  with 
the  provisions  of  this  act.  It  shall  be  their  duty,  un- 
less otherwise  directed  by  the  school  visitors,  to  spend 
at  least  half  a  day  in  each  school  visit ;  it  shall  be  his 
or  their  duty  to  make  a  full  annual  report  of  the  con- 
dition of  the  common  schools  of  said  town  and  of  all 


•Ibid,  1868.  23,  Sec.  3,  p.  12. 

'Ibid.     1858,  24.     Sec.  4.  p.  12. 

TMd.     Cbap.  2,  Sec.  1-6,  1856,  pp.  13-14. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  23 

the  important  facts  concerning  the  same,  to  the  super- 
intendent of  common  schools,  on  or  before  the  first  day 
of  October,  annually  and  to  answer  in  writing  all  in- 
quiries that  may  be  propounded  to  him  or  them  on  the 
subject  of  common  schools  by  said  superintendent.    He 
or  they  shall  also  prepare  an  abstract  of  such  report, 
to  be  read  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  said  town.1 
For  time  actually  employed  the  acting  visitor  or  visi- 
tors were  to  receive  "the  sum  of  one  dollar  twenty-five 
cents  each,  per  day,"  the  payment  of  this  sum  subject 
to  his  making  the  report  required  by  law  and  the  report's 
being  approved  by  the  board  of  visitors.    In  this  law  we 
see  a  movement  away  from  the  extremely  decentralized 
district  system  to  the  increasing  responsibility  of  town 
supervision.     In  1865  a  law  was  passed  providing  that 
any  town  at  any  time  might  consolidate  all  the  school 
districts  within  its  borders  into  one  district;1  such  con- 
solidation depended  upon  a  majority  vote  by  a  majority 
of  the  districts  concerned.    The  next  year  this  law  was 
made  mandatory/  These  consolidated  towns  or  union  dis- 
tricts were  required  to  elect  "six,  twelve,  or  eighteen  male 
residents  of  the  town  as  a  school  committee."4      Under 
this  law  the  committee  had  in  general  the  powers  and 
was  required  to  perform  the  duties  that  previous  to  the 
passage  of  the  law  had  "devolved  upon  district  commit- 
tees and  boards  of  school  visitors."8  The  law  not  only  did 
away  with  the  dual  control  of  district  committees  and 
boards  of  visitors  but  it  also  gave  the  new  union  district 
committee  power  to  "appoint  one  or  more  acting  visitors 
or  superintendent  under  their  direction  to  examine  teach- 

»Laws  of  the  State  of  Conn.,  I860,  p.  32,  Par.  96,  Sec.  3. 

'Laws  of  the  State  of  Conn,  relating  to  Education,  1868,  p.  24, 
Sec.  61-62. 

'Ibid,  p.  31,  "1866,  Sec.  1."  (The  following  year  this  mandatory  con- 
solidation was  repealed,  1867,  Sec.  1.) 

«Ibld,  p.  31-32,  "1866,  Sec.  2." 

•Ibid.  p.  32.  "1866,  Sec.  3." 


24      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

ers  and  visit  schools."  The  old  board  of  school  visitors  was 
gone;  but  the  concept  of  their  chief  member  "the  acting 
visitor"  remained,  although,  from  now  on  he  was  to  be 
permitted  a  new  title  and  would  ultimately  be  clothed 
with  additional  powers  and  greater  responsibility.  Such 
are  the  milestones  in  the  slow  but  sure  development  of  the 
legal  machinery  and  underlying  causal  conceptions  which 
lead  to  the  better  legal  organization  of  school  administra- 
tion. 

The  laws  of  the  next  fifteen  years  indicate  a  backward 
trend  of  public  sentiment  toward  the  decentralization  of 
towns  into  the  old  district  organizatipn.  However,  the 
permissive  features  of  the  law  of  1866  remained  with  two 
slight  exceptions.  The  question  of  consolidation  or  de- 
centralization rested  upon  a  majority  vote  of  all  the 
electors  of  the  town,"  and  the  term  "superintendent"7  was 
omitted  from  the  wording  of  the  act  as  quoted  above. 

After  a  period  of  debate  lasting  twenty  years  the  word 
"superintendent"  again  was  written  into  the  law — this 
time  to  stay — and  with  the  additional  provision  that  he 
might  be  "not  one  of  their  own  number,"  i.  e.,  one  of  the 
board  or  committee.1  His  salary  was  fixed  at  two  dollars 
a  day,  each,  for  the  time  actually  employed  in  the  perform- 
ance of  their  duties — and  "such  further  compensation  as 
their  respective  towns  may  fix  at  an  annual  meeting."1 

The  slowness  with  which  old  ideas  disappear  and  new 


•"Laws  of  the  State  of  Conn,   relating  to  Education,   1879."   p.   21,  also 

-1875,  Sec.  1-2." 
'Ibid,  p.  22,  "1875,  Sec.  4." 

JLaws  of  the  State  of  Connecticut,  1886,  page  1,  chap.  39. 
An  Act  Concerning  Acting  School  Visitors. 

Section  1.  Boards  of  Education,  town  committees  and  board  of 
school  visitors  may  appoint  a  person,  not  one  of  their  own  number, 
to  be  acting  school  visitor  or  superintendent  of  schools. 

Section  2.  The  acting  school  visitor  or  superintendent  thus  ap- 
pointed shall  have  all  powers,  perform  all  the  duties  and  receive 
the  pay  now  prescribed  by  law  for  acting  school  visitors. 

Section  3.     Any  town,  at  its  annual  town  meeting,  may  fix  the 
compensation  of  the  acting  school  visitor  or  superintendent. 
'Ibid,  1886.  Sec.  13,  p.  24. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  Of  THE  OFFICE  25 

concepts  gain  a  place  in  the  law  is  shown  in  Chapter  195, 
paragraph  I,  of  the  Act  of  1903  providing  for  "Super- 
vision of  Schools." 

The  town  school  committee  or  board  of  education  or 
board  of  school  visitors  of  any  town  may  choose  by 
ballot  a  superintendent  of  schools  and  may  fix  the  sal- 
ary and  prescribe  the  duties  of  acting  visitor  as  now 
prescribed  by  law.  A  majority  vote  of  all  the  members 
of  the  committee  or  board  shall  be  necessary  to  an  elec- 
tion.3 

And  it  is  well  in  this  connection  to  note  the  persistence 
of  the  idea  -written  in  the  original  law  of  1856  and  re- 
iterated again  in  1872  and  1888,  namely,  that  the  secre- 
tary of  the  board  of  school  visitors  should  always  be  the 
acting  visitor  or  one  of  the  acting  visitors.4  Even  in 
1904  the  election  of  a  superintendent  of  schools  was  only 
permissive;  and  boards  still  had  the  privilege  of  making 
their  secretary  the  acting  school  visitor. 

But  the  law  of  1903  definitely  recognized  the  office  of 
"superintendent"  and  did  not  make  it  synonomous  with 
the  term  "acting  visitor."  The  persistence  of  the  old  con- 
cept held  over,  however  in  that  the  superintendent's 
duties  "shall  always  include  the  duties  of  acting  visitor 
as  now  prescribed  by  law." 

This  law  of  1903  marked  two  great  steps  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  superintendency.  First,  it  stated  minimum 
requirements  for  eligibility  to  the  office  of  superintendent 
and  the  right  of  the  State  to  approve  each  candidate  for 


'Conn.  School  Document  No.  3,  1904,  Laws  relating  to  Schools,  Chap 
9,  Sec.  115,  p.  34. 

«I^aws  of  the  State  of  Conn.,  1856.  Paragraph  103,  page  31,  Chap.  8. 
The  secretary  and  other  school  visitors  shall  receive  two  dollars 
a  day  each  while  actually  employed,  and  a  llge  proportion  for  parts 
days,  and  such  further  compensation  as  their  respective  towns 
may  fix  at  an  annual  meeting. 


26      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

appointment.6  Second,  the  law  further  recognized  the 
State's  interest  in  the  proper  local  supervision  of  schools 
by  providing  for  the  creation  of  local  "supervision  dis- 
tricts" with  superintendents  approved  by  the  State  and 
drawing  half  (not  to  exceed  eight  hundred  dollars  per 
year)  of  their  salary  from  the  State.  The  same  law  ex- 
tended this  principle  even  further  by  providing  that,  when 
a  local  district  employing  not  more  than  ten"  teachers 
petitioned  the  state  board  of  education  the  latter  should 
be  "authorized  to  appoint  an  agent  who  shall  discharge 
the  duties  of  superintendent  and  who  shall  be  qualified  as 
provided  in  Section  118,"  the  State  to  pay  three-quarters 
of  his  salary  and  the  local  district  one-quarter. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  above  law  was  permissive  only 
and  its  operation  rested  on  local  initiative;7  but  in  1910 
thirty-three  towns  had  employed  superintendents;  twelve 
districts  were  operating  under  the  provision  for  "super- 
vision districts ;"  six  towns  with  twenty  to  thirty  teachers 
each  were  enjoying  the  same  financial  privileges  from 
the  State  as  the  supervision  districts  (see  Act  of  1909, 
chapter  225,  paragraph  2)  ;  and  sixty-three  towns  em- 
ploying less  than  twenty  teachers  each  had  supervising 
agents  appointed  by  the  State  board  of  education.  The 
State's  interests  in  the  local  supervision  of  schools  and 
its  willingness  to  pay  for  the  same  had  borne  fruit..  Six 
years  of  experience  had  convinced  the  people  of  Connec- 
ticut that  they  could  secure  better  supervision  of  their 
schools  through  the  help  and  control  of  their  State  edu- 
cational authorities  than  they  could  through  their  locally 

5Laws  of  1904,  page  35,  section  118,  chapter  9.  Par.  118.  No  person 
shall  be  eligible  for  appointment  under  Paragraph  115  who  hat> 
not  had  at  least  five  years'  successful  experience  as  a  teacher  or 
superintendent,  or  who  does  not  hold  a  certificate  of  approval  by 
the  state  board  of  education 

•Conn.  School  Document  No.  3,  1904.  Laws  Relating  to  Schools,  p.  35, 
section  119,  chapter  9. 

TConn.  School  Document  No.  10,  1910.  Laws  Relating  to  Schools, 
p.  46.  47,  48. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  27 

elected  representatives  and  so  in  1909  we  find  the  State 
legislature  passing  the  following  mandatory  legislation: 

Every  town  which  employs  not  more  than  thirty 
teachers  and  in  which  there  is  no  superintendent  of 
schools  or  supervision  agent  shall,  at  its  first  annual 
or  biennial  town  meeting  after  January  i,  1910,  vote 
by  ballot  to  determine  whether  it  will  instruct  its 
school  visitors,  town  school  committee,  or  board  of 
education  to  employ  a  superintendent  of  schools  or  re- 
quest the  appointment  of  a  supervising  agent  under 
the  provision  of  this  Act.1 

Such  was  the  result  of  more  than  two  hundred  fift> 
years  of  experience  and  thought  in  Connecticut  as  to  the 
best  means  of  administering  the  schools  of  the  State. 

OHIO  GENERAL  LEGISLATION 

The  first  State  Constitution  of  Ohio,  1802,  devoted  Ar- 
ticle VIII  to  the  cause  of  education.  The  first  public 
school  law  was  passed  by  the  general  assembly,  January 
22,  1821.'  It  permitted  the  people  of  each  township  to 
determine  whether  they  would  have  free  district  schools. 
It  provided  for  the  election  of  a  school  committee  of  three 
householders  in  each  district  who  were  to  serve  for  one 
year;  and  enumerated  their  powers  and  duties  at  some 
length.  February  5,  1825,  a  second  law  was  passed 
making  it  mandatory  for  the  trustees  of  each  township  to 
divide  the  same  into  school  districts.  The  duties  of  the 
school  committee  were  practically  the  same  as  in  the 
permissive  law  of  1821.  The  county  court  of  common 
pleas  was  to  appoint  annually  "three  examiners  of  com- 
mon schools,  who,  in  addition  to  examining  candidates 
for  certificates,  were  clothed  with  the  function  of  visiting 
the  schools."  This  latter  function  was  permissive  only ; 
and  there  is  little  evidence  that  the  power  was  ever  exer- 


•Connecticut  Laws  of  1910,  p.  48,  Sec.  142.   (Ch.  10.) 
•Hin&dale  "History  of  the  Ohio  School  System,  p.  132. 


28      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

cised.  "By  the  law  of  March  10,  1831,  school  directors 
(were)  constituted  a  body  politic  and  corporate,"4  and  a 
provision  of  the  same  law  made  the  clerk  of  each  school 
district  responsible  for  taking  annually  a  "list  or  enumer- 
ation in  writing,  of  all  the  white  youth  in  his  district  be- 
tween the  ages  of  four  and  twenty-one  years"  and  for 
making  a  return  of  the  same  to  the  county  auditor. 

The  office  of  state  superintendent  of  common  schools 
was  created  in  1837;  and  a  new  educational  law'  was 
passed  March  7,  1838.  This  law  recognized  the  need  of 
better  local  supervision.  "Every  township  clerk  was 
made  superintendent  of  common  schools  within  his 
township,  his  duties  included  visiting  all  the  schools  an- 
nually, inspecting  the  teachers'  records,  observing  the 
management  and  making  suggestions  to  teachers,  filling 
casual  vacancies  in  boards  of  directors,  assuming  direc- 
tors' functions  himself  when  boards  failed  to  serve,  and 
taking  the  enumeration  of  school  children,  a  task  which 
had  hitherto  devolved  upon  the  district  clerk  since  1831." 
The  law  also  provided  "that  cities,  encorporated  towns, 
or  boroughs  shall  constitute  separate  school  districts 
wherein  the  electors  shall  choose  either  three  directors 
from  the  district  at  large,  or  one  from  each  sub-district." 
During  the  next  decade,  the  law  of  1838  was  amended, 
at  various  times,  lessening  the  power  of  the  township  su- 
perintendent and  again  increasing  the  power  of  the  dis- 
trict directors:  the  term  of  directors  was  increased  to 
three  years,  one  being  elected  each  year.  Not  until  1851 
did  the  township  clerk  regain  the  standing  as  township 
superintendent  of  schools  that  was  delegated  to  him 
under  the  Act  of  1838. 

The  Act  of  February  21,  1849,  provided  for  the  better 


•Hinsdale  History  of  the  Ohio  School  System. 
•Ibid,  pages  138-140. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  2O, 

regulation  of  schools  in  cities,  incorporated  towns  and  vil- 
lages, "two  thirds  of  whose  inhabitants  should  petition 
the  town  council  for  its  adoption."1  It  provided  for  the 
election  of  six  school  directors,  two  chosen  annually  for  a 
term  of  three  years.  "The  Act  of  1849 — seems  to  have 
given  the  municipal  council  no  place  at  all  in  the  system. 
The  board  of  education  was  made  the  taxing  authority; 
but  it  had  to  submit  the  question  to  the  people  and  the 
rate  of  the  tax  was  limited  to  four  mills.  A  statement 
of  finances  and  certain  other  matters  had  to  be  made  pub- 
lic at  each  annual  election." 

In  1853  a  new  law  brought  about  a  modification  of  the 
township  organization.1  It  provided  for  a  township  board 
of  education  consisting  of  a  township  clerk  and  the  clerks 
of  each  of  the  sub-districts  of  the  township.  This  town- 
ship board  could  "appoint  one  of  its  members  acting  man- 
ager of  schools  for  the  township,  with  such  duties  as  the 
board  might  prescribe  with  relation  to  the  management 
and  supervision  of  the  different  schools."  He  was  to 
receive  compensation  for  his  services.  This  privilege  of 
appointing  "an  acting  manager"  was  likewise  delegated  to 
boards  of  cities  and  towns.1  Such  was  the  early  effort  of 
the  State  of  Ohio  to  meet  the  needs  for  local  supervision 
of  schools.  During  the  next  twenty  years  Ohio  had  very 
little  general  legislation  affecting  the  administration  of 
schools  in  incorporated  towns  and  cities. 

The  law  of  May  i,  1873,  introduced  the  idea  of  classi- 
fication of  cities  for  purposes  of  school  legislation.4  All 
cities  having  a  population  of  ten  thousand  or  more  by 
the  census  of  1870  were  styled  city  districts  of  the  first 
class.  All  cities  of  less  than  ten  thousand  were  known 


'Hinsdale  H.  O.  S.  S.,  pages  142-143. 
'Ibid.  148-149,  Ohio  School  Laws,   1865.  p.   17-27. 
»Ohlo  School  Laws,  1865,  pp.  81-82,  Sec.  LXVI. 
«Hinsdale,  H.  O.  S.  S.,  pp.  151-152. 


3O      LEGAI,  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

as  city  school  districts  of  the  second  class."  The  law  also 
recognized  village,  special,  and  township  districts.  The 
latter  included  all  territory  outside  of  incorporated  vil- 
lage or  city  districts  and  were  made  up  of  sub-districts. 
In  cities  of  the  second  class  the  board  was  to  consist  of 
six  members  elected  at  large,  except  in  those  districts 
which  had  already  organized  with  the  board  of  three 
members,  or  who  chose  to  adopt  the  scheme  of  ward 
membership — when  they  should  elect  one  member  from 
each  ward.*  This  law  made  two  other  definite  advances 
over  previous  legislation.  It  made  the  board  of  educa- 
tion free  from  the  control  of  the  municipal  government 
by  giving  the  board  of  education  control  over  all  school 
property1  and  by  vesting  in  it  the  sole  power  of  levying* 
local  school  taxes  and  controlling  school  finances.  Here 
we  first  note  in  the  Ohio  general  school  law  the  right  of 
the  board  to  elect  a  clerk'  who  may  not  be  a  member  of  the 
board.  Each  board  was  explicitly  empowered  "to  appoint 
a  superintendent4  and  assistant  superintendent  of  the 
schools,  (and)  a  superintendent  of  buildings."  About 
this  time  the  law  begins  to  specify  certain  duties  .of  the 
superintendent.  He  must  give  certain  information7  to  the 
city  board  of  examiners,  keep*  the  records  and  report  to 
the  board  "each  year  such  matters  as  they  deem  import- 
ant or  necessary  for  information  in  regard  to  the  man- 
agement and  conduct  of  the  schools,  and  to  make  such 
suggestions  and  recommendations  as  they  may  deem 
advisable  relative  to  methods  of  instruction,  school  man- 
agement, or  other  matters  of  educational  interest."  Here 

•Ohio  School  Laws,  1880,  pp.  5-7,  sec.   3885-3892. 
•Ibid,  1880,  p.  9,  chap.  3,  sec.  3904-3907.  . 
Ubid,  1880,  Chap.  7,  pp.  45-48.     Sec.  3971-3972. 
'Ibid,  1880,  p.  39,  Sec.  3950-3960. 
'Ibid,  1880,  p.  49,  Sec.  3980. 
4Ibid,    1880,   pp.    69-70,    Sec.    4017. 
TIbid  1880,  p.  103,  Sec.  4078 
»rbid,  1880,  p.  92-93,  Sec.  4069. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  3! 

too,  in  an  opinion  rendered  by  the  State  Commissioner  of 
Common  Schools  we  find  the  germ  of  a  new  principle  of 
school  legislation,  viz.,  the  responsibility  for  the  exercise 
of  a  function  differentiated  between  the  board  of  educa- 
tion on  the  one  hand  and  the  superintendent  and  the 
teachers  on  the  other.  The  opinion  reads,  "The  General 
Course  of  Study  shall  be  prescribed  by  the  board  of  edu- 
cation, but  the  studies  to  be  pursued  and  the  lessons  to  be 
prepared  by  each  pupil  should  be  left  to  the  teachers  or 
superintendent."7 

The  passage  of  the  compulsory  education  law,  April 
25,  1890,  marked  a  further  step  in  the  progress  of  general 
school  legislation  affecting  the  superintendency.  First, 
in  the  city  schools  the  superintendent  was  the  only  school 
officer  entitled  under  the  law  to  excuse  a  child  of  com- 
pulsory school  age  from  school  attendance,  or  to  decide 
whether  or  not  private  instruction  was  satisfactory  to 
legal  requirements :  any  appeal  from  the  superintendent's 
decision  had  to  be  taken  to  the  probate  judge  whose  deci- 
sion was  final.1  Secondly,  the  superintendent  was  sub- 
ject to  a  penalty  under  the  law  for  non-enforcement  of 
the  provisions  of  the  act.1  During  this  same  period  a 
"temperance  instruction  law"  was  passed  and  the  super- 
intendent as  a  school  official  was  held  subject  to  a  penalty 
for  wilfully  refusing  or  neglecting  to  provide  for  the 
enforcement  of  the  act.1 

The  next  legislation  we  note  directly  modifying  the 
office  of  superintendency  of  schools  was  passed  April  25, 
1904.  It  did  away  with  all  classification  and  gradation 
of  city  school  districts.4  This  law  compromised  the  two 

TOhio  State  School  Law,  1880.  p.  73,  Footnote  to  Sec.  4020. 

K)hlo  State  School   Law,   1900,   pp.   145-147,    (1422-1)    Sec.    1,    (4022-3) 

Sec.  3. 

'Ibid,  1900,  p.   152   (4022-11)    Sec.  11. 
•Ibid,   1900,  p.   143   (4020-25)    Sec.  3. 
«Ohio   School   Law.    1904,   p.   15,   Sec.   3886. 
•Ibid,  p.   19,  Sec.  3897. 


32       LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

schemes  of  school  board  representation8  in  that  it  pro- 
vided that  from  two  to  seven  members  should  be  elected 
from  the  city  at  large ;  and  that  from  two  to  thirty  mem- 
bers should  be  elected  one  each  from  each  sub-district. 
Within  these  limits  each  city  was  to  decide  the  size  of  its 
board  of  education  and  to  divide  the  city  into  sub-districts. 
The  independence  of  the  city  school  authorities  from  all 
other  municipal  authorities  was  maintained.*  Under  the 
law  the  board  of  education  had  "full  power  to  appoint  a 
superintendent  of  the  public  schools ;.  . .  .  ;  and,  if  deemed 

essential  for  the  best  interests  of  the  schools the 

board  may,  under  proper  rules  and  regulations,  appoint 
a  superintendent  of  buildings."7  This  latter  official  was 
known  in  the  law,  also  as  "a  director  of  schools."  His 
term  was  fixed  at  two  years  and  his  maximum  salary  was 
$5000  per  year.  His  powers  and  duties  were  enumerated 
at  length.  All  of  his  official  acts  were  subject  to  the  ap- 
proval and  confirmation  of  the  board.  His  only  legal 
connection  to  the  superintendent  was  a  requirement  that 
"the  payroll  for  teachers,  assistant  teachers  and  super- 
visors shall  be  countersigned  by  the  superintendent  of 
instruction."  Section  401  ja  of  the  law  made  it  manda- 
tory for  each  city  board  of  education  "to  appoint  a  suit- 
able person  to  act  as  superintendent  of  the  public  schools 
of  the  district."8  His  term  was  not  to  exceed  five  years. 
Upon  the  acceptance  of  his  appointment,  he  was  "thereby 
empowered  to  appoint,  subject  to  the  approval  and  confir- 
mation of  the  Board,  all  the  teachers,"  and  he  might  "for 
cause  suspend  any  person  thus  appointed  until  the  board 
or  a  committee  of  the  board  may  consider  each  suspen- 
sion." A  city  board  "upon  a  three-fourths  vote  of  its 

•Ohio  School  Laws,   1904,  pp.   33-35,   Sec.   3971-3972. 

TIbld,  p.  103,  Sec.  4017. 

»Qhio  School  Laws,  1904,  p.  105. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  oF  THE  OFFICE         33 

full  membership"  might  reemploy  any  teacher  whom  the 
superintendent  had  refused  to  appoint.  His  duties  were 
further  specified  as  follows:  "Said  superintendent  shall 
visit  the  schools  under  his  charge,  direct  and  assist  teach- 
ers in  the  performance  of  their  duties,  classify  and  con- 
trol the  promotion  of  pupils,  and  perform  such  other 
duties  as  the  board  may  determine."  He  was  also  re- 
quired to  report  to  the  board  annually,  and  oftener  if  re- 
quired, as  to  all  matters  under  his  supervision."  The 
board  might  require  him  to  attend  any  or  all  meetings  of 
the  board ;  and  when  there  he  had  the  privilege  of  taking 
part  in  all  deliberations  but  had  no  vote.  The  law  also  gave 
the  superintendent  or  a  person  authorized  by  him  the  sole 
authority  for  granting  age  and  schooling  certificates.1 

With  only  slight  exceptions  the  law  of  1904  so  far  as 
it  concerns  the  office  of  the  superintendency  is  still  in 

force.1     The  election  of  a  "director  of  schools"  is  still 

, — • 

permissive.  The  experience  of  Ohio  cities  as  to  size  and 
representation  on  boards  of  education  presumably  crys- 
tallized during  the  fifteen  year  period  into  the  general 
school  law  of  1919  which  provided  that  cities  under  50,000 
population  should  elect  a  board  of  education  of  from  three 
to  five  members  from  the  city  at  large;  that  cities  above 
150,000  should  elect  from  the  city  at  large  a  board  of 
from  five  to  seven  members ;  and  that  cities  of  from 
50,000  to  150,000  population,  in  addition  to  from  two  to 
seven  members  elected  at  large,  might  divide  the  city  into 
two  sub-districts  and  elect  one  member  from  each  sub- 
district.3  After  three  quarters  of  a  century  of  experimen- 
tation, Ohio's  verdict  is  in  favor  of  small  boards  elected 
at  large. 

»Ohlo  School  Laws,  1904,  p.  114,  Sec.  4022-2. 

'Ohio  School  Laws,  1915,  p.  247,  Sec.  7703. 

'Advance  Sheets,  Ohio  School  Laws,  1919,  p.   19.   Sec.  4698. 


34      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
OHIO.      SPECIAL    LEGISLATION 

In  addition  to  the  account  of  general  city  school  legis- 
lation given  above,  certain  experiments  in  local  city 
school  administration  permitted  through  special  charter 
legislation  are  of  interest.  The  first  special  city  charter4 
granted  was  to  Cincinnati,  February  12,  1829.  This 
charter  created  three  bodies  responsible  for  city  school 
administrative  functions.  The  city  council  was  the  chief 
body  and  controlled  all  fiscal  matters ;  a  board  of  trustees 
and  visitors  consisting  of  one  member  from  each  ward, 
elected  by  the  voters,  was  vested  with  the  appointing 
and  organizing  powers ;  the  "board  of  examiners  and  in- 
spectors" appointed  by  the  board  of  trustees  and  visitors, 
examined  teachers  and  inspected  from  time  to  time  the 
instruction  and  government  of  the  schools. 

In  1850  an  act  was  passed  which  authorized  the  quali- 
fied voters  of  Cincinnati  to  elect  annually  one  superin- 
tendent of  schools.  His  duties  were  to  visit  all  the  com- 
mon schools  in  the  city  and  establish  under  the  direction 
of  the  board  of  trustees  and  visitors  a  course  of  study; 
also  to  make  rules  and  regulations  to  promote  the  progress 
of  the  school."5  Here  again  was  vested  in  a  single  office 
filled  by  one  man  certain  of  the  inspectorial  or  super- 
visory functions  that  had  belonged  to  the  "board  of  ex- 
aminers and  inspectors"  and  certain  administration  func- 
tions that  formerly  had  rested  upon  the  "board  of  trustees 
and  visitors."  In  1853,  "the  functions  of  levying  school 
taxes,  providing  school  houses,  and  laying  off  school  dis- 
tricts" were  taken  from  the  city  council  and  vested  in 
the  school  board  which  now  consisted  of  two  members 
elected  from  each  ward. 

The  following  taken  from  "an  abstract  of  the  report  of 
the  Board  of  Education  of  the  City  of  Cleveland,"  1854, 

'Hinsdale,  The  History  of  Ohio's  School  System,  p.  141. 
'Ibid,  p.  141. 


HlSTORlCAt  DEVELOPMENT  Otf  THE  O^lCE  35 

throws  interesting  light  on  the  shortcomings  of  the  Act- 
ing Manager  provided  for  in  the  act  of  1847,  and  the 
reasons  given  at  the  time  for  electing  a  superintendent. 

Superintendent  of  Instruction. — This  is  also  a  new 
feature  in  our  system.  The  Acting  Manager,  assisted 
by  the  members  of  the  Board,  had  exercised  a  general 
supervision  and  care  over  the  school.  Their  attention, 
however,  was  necessaritly  directed  more  to  business 
than  to  instruction.  There  had  been  no  one  to  super- 
intend this  department,  with  special  reference  to  intro- 
ducing the  best  methods  of  instruction  and  discipline. 
The  want  of  superintendence  had  long  been  felt.  To 
supply  this  want,  to  produce  uniform  classification,  and 
to  add  to  the  general  efficiency  and  usefulness  of  our 
schools,  the  office  of  Superintendent  of  Instruction  was 
created.1 

At  the  same  time  there  was  "conferred  upon  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Board  the  duties  and  powers  formerly  exer- 
cised by  the  Acting  Manager."  The  concept,  embodied 
in  the  above  statement,  of  the  superintendent  as  solely  a 
supervisor  of  instruction  is  embodied  clearly  in  the  enu- 
meration of  the  "Duties  of  the  Superintendent"  as  set 
forth  in  the  "School  Rules  and  Regulations,  revised  and 
adopted,  October,  1856."'  The  "Manual  of  the  Board"5 
as  contained  in  the  annual  report  of  the  Cleveland  Board 
of  Education  for  1868-69  enumerates  the  following  pow- 
ers and  duties  of  the  Superintendent: 

To  be  the  Executive  Officer  of  the  Board. 

To  supervise  the  work  of  Instruction,  etc. 

To  prepare  Blanks  and  prescribe  Rules  for  Reports. 

Inspect  School  Buildings,  and  report  condition  thereof. 

Keep  the  Board  advised  as  to  School  Systems,  etc. 

To  fix  and  observe  office  hours. 


'Annual  Report  of  the  State  Commissioner  of  Common  Schools  in  Ohio, 

1854,   p.  89-106. 

•Cleveland'  Annual  Report,  Board  of  Education,  1855-56,  p.  84. 
•Cleveland,  Annual  Report,  Board  of  Education,  1868-69,  pp.  149-151. 


36      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

To  make  reports. 
To  call  Teachers'  Meetings. 

To  fill  Vacancies  and  make  Temporary  Arrangements. 
To  fix  the  Time,  Mode  and  Standards  of  Examinations. 
To  perform  other  Duties  prescribed  by  the  Board. 
The  relative  importance,  in  the  judgment  of  the  board, 
of  their  two  chief  officers,  is  indicated  in  their  respective 
salaries:4  Superintendent  of  Instruction,  $4000;   Super- 
intendent of  Buildings,  $1800. 

In  the  mass  of  special  legislation  enacted  between  1880 
and  1900  under  the  guise  of  general  legislation  for  grades 
of  cities  in  the  first  class  we  find  Cleveland  experimenting 
with  an  entirely  different  sort  of  city  school  administra- 
tion. "The  legislative  powers  and  authority"  was  vested 
in  a  school  council  consisting  of  seven  members,  and  re- 
ceiving an  annual  salary  of  $260  each.  The  term  of 
office  was  fixed  at  two  years.  The  law  also  provided  for 
the  biennial  election  by  the  qualified  voters  of  the  dis- 
trict of  a  "school  director"  who  should  be  the  executive 
head  of  the  school  system,  devote  his  entire  time  to  the 
duties  of  his  office,  and  receive  an  annual  salary  of  $5000. 
Among  his  duties  was  the  following : 

(Superintendent  of  Instruction;  term,  etc.) 
I.  The  school  director  shall,  subject  to  the  approval 
of  and  confirmation  by  the  council,  appoint  a  superin- 
tendent of  instruction,  who  shall  remain  in  office  dur- 
ing good  behavior  and  the  school  director  may  at  any 
time,  for  sufficient  cause,  remove  him ;  but  the  order  for 
such  removal  shall  be  in  writing,  x  specify  ing  the  cause 
therefor,  and  shall  be  entered  upon  the  records  of  his 
office;  and  he  shall  forthwith  report  the  same  to  the 
council,  together  with  the  reasons  therefor.  The  super- 
I    intendent  of  instruction  shall  have  the  sole  power  to 
I    appoint  and  discharge  all  assistants  and  teachers  au- 
I     thorized  by  the  council  to  be  employed,  and  shall  report 

'Cleveland,  Annual  Report  Board  of  Education,  1868-69. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  Of  THE  OFFICE  37 

to  the  school  director  in  writing  annually,  and  oftener 
if  required,  as  to  all  matters  under  his  supervision,  and 
may  be  required  by  the  council  to  attend  any  or  all  of 
its  meetings ;  and  except  as  otherwise  provided  in  this 
act,  all  employees  of  the  board  of  education  shall  be 
appointed  or  employed  by  the  school  director.     He 
shall  report  to  the  council  annually,  or  oftener  if  re- 
quired, as  to  all  matters  under  his  supervision.     He 
shall  attend  all  meetings  of  the  council  and  may  take 
part  in  its  deliberations,  subject  to  its  rules,  but  shall 
not  have  the  right  to  vote.  (89  v.  76).* 
This  act  seems  to  have  been  the  culmination  in  Ohio 
legislation  of  an  ideal  of  school  administration  that  sub- 
ordinated the  professional  school  executive  to  a  lay  execu- 
tive elected  by  the  people;  and  it  is  typical  of  a  scheme 
that  has  carried  over  into  many  cities  of  the  country 
under  a  commission  form  of  government.     In  Cleveland 
it  did  not  last  as  was  noted  above  in  the  general  legis- 
lation of  1904. 

SUMMARY 

1.  The   earlier   school   legislation   delegated   the   local 
enforcement  of  the  same  to  civil  authorities,  such  as  the 
selectmen   and   grand  jurymen   of   Connecticut,    and   the 
township  clerk  of  Ohio. 

2.  This  principle  of  vesting  local  civil  authorities  with 
the  local  administration  of  schools  has  gradually  lost  force 
until  in  Ohio  and  Connecticut  we  find  the  only  trace  of 
it  in  the  control  that  the  town  selectmen  of  Connecticut 
have  over  the  question  of  building  and  the  taxing  power. 

3.  The  first  legislation  that  sought  to  create  officials 
responsible  solely  for  local  administration  and  supervi- 
sion of  schools,  provided  for    the    election     of    boards, 
usually  by  popular  vote,  such  as  the  board  of  school 

'Ohio   School   Laws,   1900,   pp.    30-31,    (3899-10),  Sec.   10. 


38      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

visitors  in  Connecticut  and  the  board  of  trustees  and  visi- 
tors in  Cincinnati  (special  charter  1829). 

4.  The  next  step  was  to  empower  these  boards  to  ap- 
point a  sub-committee  which  should  be  responsible  for 
performing  the  duties  assigned  by  law  to  the  full  board. 
In  Connecticut  these  were  known  as  the  Acting  School 
Visitors.      In  Cincinnati  a  similar  committee  from  the 
functional  standpoint  was  the  "board  of  examiners  and 
inspectors." 

5.  The   powers   and   duties   of   these   sub-committees 
gradually  crystallized,  in  various  forms,  into  one  official 
position: — in  Connecticut  the  "Acting  Visitor;"  in  Ohio 
the  "Acting  Manager." 

6.  In  the  earlier  forms,  this  one   position  invariably 
included  the  clerical  or  secretarial  duties  of  the  Board. 
This  is  illustrated  in  the  clause  of  the  Connecticut  law 
which  provides  that  the  board  of  visitors  might  appoint 
one  or  more  of  their  number  as  acting  visitors,  one  of 
whom  should  be  the  clerk  of  the  board.    The  same  prin- 
ciple is  illustrated  in  the  reorganization  of  the  Cleve- 
land board  in  1853,  which  delegated  the  powers  of  the 
former  Acting  Manager  to  the  Secretary,  and  created 
the  office  of  Superintendent  of  Instruction. 

7.  The  supervisory  and  executive  functions  of  the  com- 
mittee of  one  differentiated  into  the  office  of  superintend- 
ent of  instruction. 

8.  In  Ohio  the  executive  functions   further  differen- 
tiated into  two  positions :  a  director  of  schools  and  a  su- 
perintendent.   The  relative  importance  of  the  two  is  indi- 
cated in  the  fact  that  a  director  may  be  elected ;  a  super- 
intendent must  be. 

9.  After  some  trial  of  almost  every  possible  scheme  of 
local  school  administrative  machinery,  in  both  states,  the 
law  recognized  the  value  of  small  boards,  elected  at  large 
— this  board  to  appoint  the  superintendent. 


HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  OFFICE  39 

10.  The  law  recognizes  the  superintendent  as  a  State 
official,  in  that  it — 

a.  Empowers  a  centralized  State  authority  to  deter- 

mine the  qualifications  for  the    office    and    to 
juds:e  the  fitness  of  each  individual. 

b.  Specifies  certain  duties  and  responsibilities  of  the 

office. 

c.  Assigns  to  the  superintendent  duties  over  which 

the  board  of  education  has  no  control  whatso- 
ever. 

d.  Holds   the  superintendent  liable  to  penalty   for 

non-performance  of  certain  specified  duties. 

11.  The  Connecticut  law  has  recognized  the  right  of 
the  state  centralized  educational  authority  to  appoint  and 
dismiss  the  local  superintendent  when  said  State  authori- 
ty is  responsible  for  payment  of  part  of  said  superintend- 
ent's salary. 


CHAPTER  III 

GENERAL  SCHOOL  LAWS  CONCERNING  CITY 
SCHOOL  ADMINISTRATION 

"In  law  we  have  the  persistence  of  parchment,  of  Latin 
terms,  of  obsolete  phrases,  of  seals,  of  criers,  of  wigs  and 
gowns."  —Ross,  Social  Control,  p.  193. 

Likewise  in  the  school  laws  of  today  we  find  inter- 
woven with  new  concepts  old  ideas  that  were  written  into 
the  law  during  a  pioneer  period ;  and  we  find  principles 
of  a  modern  day  operating  as  best  they  can  through  an 
administrative  organization  that  has  long  outlived  its 
usefulness. 

The  essence  of  this  chapter  is  tabulated  in  Chart  A  of 
the  appendix.  The  information  is  taken  from  the  publica- 
tion of  school  laws  of  each  state  under  the  date  given  in 
the  chart.  In  a  few  cases  where  the  session  laws  of  each 
session  of  the  general  assembly  or  legislature  of  the  state 
were  available  in  addition  to  the  publication  of  the  gen- 
eral school  law,  the  date  on  the  chart  indicates  that  all 
laws  in  force  up  to  and  including  said  date  were  read  and 
tabulated. 

Table  one  indicates  the  classification  of  districts  in  each 
state  and  the  class  or  classes  of  districts  to  which  the  data 
of  Chart  A  and  of  this  chapter  apply.  Inasmuch  as  a 
separate  chapter  is  given  to  the  school  laws  of  the  larger 
and  more  populous  cities  of  various  states,  this  chapter 
is  devoted  to  the  general  legislation  applying  to  the 
smaller  cities.  However,  in  many  of  the  states  the  class- 
ification varies  for  different  purposes;  and,  occasionally, 

40 


STATUS  Of  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  4! 

in  this  study,  a  principle  is  tabulated  when  it  applies  only 
to  a  certain  group  of  the  general  class  of  districts  under 
consideration.  While  certain  of  these  variations  are  in- 
dicated in  footnotes  or  in  the  general  discussion  of  the 
law,  the  chief  purpose  of  this  chapter  is  to  set  forth  the 
general  principles  embodied  in  the  laws  as  they  concern 
the  relationships  and  particular  responsibility  of  board  of 
education,  superintendent,  teachers,  municipal  civil  au- 
thorities, the  public,  county  officials,  and  centralized  state 
authority. 

It  should  be  noted  here,  also,  that  certain  of  the  states 
operate  their  schools  altogether  under  the  county  sys- 
tem, the  only  schools  which  are  exceptions  being  those  of 
the  cities  under  special  charters.  Florida,  Georgia  and 
Maryland  are  striking  examples  of  this  organization. 
They  are  omitted  from  this  discussion  because  their  coun- 
ty boards  and  county  superintendents  do  not  fit  into  a 
study  of  the  relationships  between  city  superintendent 
and  city  board  of  education.  North  Carolina,  South 
Carolina  and  Tennessee  constitute  a  second  group  whose 
general  legislation  for  the  administration  of  city  schools 
is  quite  limited.  Louisiana  is  included  in  the  study,  al- 
though its  parish  system  belongs  to  the  county  type  rather 
than  to  the  city  type.  California,  Arizona,  and  Missouri 
are  typical  of  a  number  of  states  where  the  county  system 
dominates  and  where  the  special  needs  of  cities  have 
been  recognized  largely  through  special  charter  legisla- 
tion. New  York  and  Pennsylvania  have  evolved  a  classi- 
fication of  cities  that  makes  legislation  for  all  cities  of  any 
designated  class  fairly  satisfactory. 

CONSTITUTIONAL  PROVISIONS 

"The  General  Assembly  shall  establish  and  maintain 
an  efficient  system  of  public  free  schools  throughout  the 
State."  — Virginia,  State  Constitution,  Sec.  129. 


42       LEGAL  STATUS  Of  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

The  foregoing  is  a  typical  constitutional  provision  for 
the  public  school  system  of  any  of  the  states.  For  the  pur- 
pose of  this  study  a  more  specific  provision  is  contained 
in  the  State  Constitution  of  Arkansas,  Article  XIV, 
Sec.  4 : 

"The  supervision  of  public  schools,  and  the  execution 
of  the  laws  regulating  the  same,  shall  be  vested  in  and 
confided  to  such  officers  as  may  be  provided  for  by  the 
general  assembly."1 

An  interpretation  of  clauses  such  as  the  above  is  set 
forth  clearly  in  an  opinion  handed  down  by  the  State 
Supreme  Court  of  Texas.  After  quoting  from  Article 

VII,  Sec.  i,  of  the  State  Constitution,  " It  shall  be 

the  duty  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  to  establish  and 
make  suitable  provisions  for  the  support  and  maintenance 
of  an  efficient  system  of  public  free  schools,"  the  court 
rendered  the  following  opinion, — "This  devolves  the  duty 
of  establishing  and  maintaining  public  free  schools  upon 
the  Legislature,  and  shows  that  the  function  of  such  es- 
tablishment and  maintenance  was  to  be  performed  by 
State  agencies .  . .  . ,  Though,  in  a  sense,  a  county  officer, 
and  though  called  'county  superintendent/  he  is,  in  fact, 
the  officer  and  agent  of  the  State,  the  State  having  as- 
sumed the  functions  of  maintaining  public  free  schools 
for  the  education  of  the  children  throughout  its  domain, 
the  counties  being  recognized  with  reference  to  that  busi- 
ness merely  as  convenient  subdivisions  of  territory,  and 
some  of  their  officers  as  proper  agents  for  the  administra- 
tion of  affairs  relating  to  the  public  free  schools." 

From  the  opinion  rendered  as  stated  above  it  was  an 
easy  and  most  logical  process  of  reasoning  that  assigned 
to  the  city  superintendent  certain  powers  and  duties  there- 

1  Arkansas  School  Laws,  1914,  p.  33   (7505). 
School  Laws,  1917,  p.  20. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES     43 

to  fore  vested  in  the  county  superintendent  when  cities 
were  made  free  of  all  county  control.' 

CLASSIFICATION  OF  CITY  DISTRICTS 

Table  I  shows  the  basis  used  by  different  states  for 
classifying  city  school  districts;  and  also  indicates  the 
smallest  unit  that  the  states  have  considered  should  em- 
ploy a  superintendent  of  schools.  A  number  of  the  states 
not  included  in  the  table  operate  under  a  county  organiza- 
tion and  so  have  made  no  provision  in  the  general  school 
law  for  the  administration  of  city  schools.  A  few,  such 
as  New  York,  classify  for  certain  purposes,  but  group  all 
of  those  classes  into  one  class  in  legislation  concerning  the 
duties  of  the  superintendent.  The  table  does  not  include 
all  states  that  have  classified  city  districts ;  but  it  is  typi- 
cal. It  shows  that  for  purposes  of  legislation  city  dis- 
tricts are  classified  on  the  basis  of  average  daily  attend- 
ance, pupils  enrolled,  school  population  of  certain  ages, 
number  of  teachers,  and  city  population.  In  Delaware  the 
willingness  and  ability  of  the  district  to  meet  certain  speci- 
fied requirements  determine  its  operation  under  the  law. 
The  table  also  shows,  not  only  the  classes  of  districts 
considered  in  this  study,  but,  particularly,  the  minimum 
size  of  cities  in  the  states  permitted  under  the  law  to  em- 
ploy a  superintendent.  Roughly,  these  minimum  figures 
are:  1000  to  5000  population,  20  to  50  teachers,  350  to 
500  pupils.  If  the  states  not  included  in  the  table  are 
considered,  also,  there  seems  to  be  a  tendency  toward 
making  population  the  basis  of  classification  for  school 
purposes. 


'North  Carolina.  1917,  p.  59,  Sec.  4137.  "By  and  with  the  consent  of 
the  county  board  of  education,  the  school  committees  of  two  or 
more  contiguous  districts  in  any  city  or  town  may,  by  a  majority 
vote  of  the  committee  in  each  district,  employ  a  practical  teacher, 
who  shall  be  known  as  the  superintendent  of  the  public  schools 
of  such  district,  and  He  shall  perform  all  duties  of  the  county 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  as  to  such  districts.  (Italics 
by  the  author. ) 


44      LEGAL  STATUS  Of  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

TABLE       1.       CLASSIFICATION      OF      CITY      DISTRICTS 

Showing  the  basis  of  classification  in  certain  typical  states,  the  classes 

of  districts  chiefly  considered  in  this  chapter,   and  indicating 

the    minimum    sized    cities    that    are    permitted    to 

employ  a  city  school   superintendent. 

Names  and   definitions 

of  classes  considered 

State                     Basis   of   Population  chiefly  in  this  study 

Alabama     Population     1st    class,    6000 ;    2nd 

class,    2000-6000 

Arizona     Average   Daily   Attendance.     500    or  more  pupils 

Arkansas     School  Pop.   6-21  yrs.  of  age     5000   or   more 

Colorado     School     Population 2nd      class,      350-1000 

pupils 

Connecticut    No.    of    Teachers 30  or  more 

Delaware    Conforming'     to     Statutory 

Provisions     Special    Districts 

Idaho     Wealth  &  No.  of  Teachers         Independent,    Class    A, 

20  or  more  teachers 

Illinois    Population     1000-100,000 

Kansas     Population     2nd        class,        2000- 

15,000 
Kentucky     . .  Population     2nd,    3rd,   4th    Classes 

2500-100,000 

Vlaine    No.  of  Teachers 50   or   more 

Montana     •  • Population     1st    Class,    8000 

Nebraska    Population     1st    Class,    5000 ;    2nd 

Class,   1000-5000 
Nevada   No.  of  Teachers Graded   Dist.      10     or 

more    teachers 
New   Hampshire    .    .  No.  of  Teachers Supervising  Unions,   20 

or   more   teachera 
Ohio    Population     Cities :       3000-50,000, 

50,000-150,000,150,- 

000 — 

Oregon    School    Population    1000  or  more  pupils 

Pennsylvania     Population     1st,  500,000 :  2nd,  30,- 

000-500,000;    3rd, 
5.000-30,000 

Utah     Population     1st  Class ;    2nd  Class 

Vermont     No.  of  Teachers' Supervision      Districts, 

25  or  more 
Virginia    Population     1st  Class,     10,000     or 

more 
Wyoming    .......    Population     City,     1000     or    more 

people 

THE  SUPERINTENDENT — HIS  RELATIONSHIP  TO  THE  ELEC- 
TORATE— HIS  TERM   OF  OFFICE  AND  TENURE 

Table   II   shows   the   provision   that   state   legislative 

bodies  have  made  for  choosing  city  school  officials,  their 

term  of  office,  and  the  authority  for  removal  of  the  chief 

executive   offcer.      Omitting   the    three    states    already 

noted,  all  of  the  others  have  local  city  boards.     In  six 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES      4$ 

• 

states  these  boards  are  appointed;  in  the  others  they  are 
elected  by  popular  vote.  In  number  they  range  from  3 
to  15  members  with  the  mode  at  5  or  6.  They  serve  from 
2  to  6  years  each  with  the  mode  at  3  years.  In  Virginia 
the  State  Board  of  Education  appoints  and  may  remove 
the  city  superintendent  of  schools.1  In  Delaware  the  city 
board  appoints  the  superintendent  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  state  commissioner  of  schools.'  In  New  Hamp- 
shire the  city  board  nominates  and  the  state  board  upon 
consultation  with  the  local  board  appoints.3  In  Penn- 
sylvania the  city  board  appoints ;  but  if  one-third  of  the 
board  and  others  of  the  city  protest  the  appointment 
to  the  state  commissioner  he  may  refuse  to  confirm  the 
appointment.4  In  Vermont  and  Connecticut  the  state 
boards  of  education  appoint  the  local  superintendent  for 
certain  classes  of  districts. 

The  usual  term  for  which  a  superintendent  may  be 
elected  is  one  year;  but  most  of  the  states  have  recog- 
nized the  value  of  a  longer  time.  Four  states  have  made 
the  term  definitely  four  years ;  one,  three  years ;  two,  two 
years;  sixteen  states  permit  boards  to  elect  for  terms  not 
to  exceed  two,  three,  four,  or  five  years,  as  the  case 
may  be;  two  or  three  have  provided  for  initial  terms  of 
one  or  two  years,  and  for  terms  of  two,  three  or  four 
years  when  reappointed.  The  underlying  principle  in  de- 
termining the  maximum  length  of  term  for  which  a  super- 
intendent may  be  elected  seems  to  be  the  length  of  term 
for  which  a  member  of  the  board  is  elected.  In  a  few 
cases  however  the  maximum  term  length  is  merely  an 
arbitrary  figure. 


lVirgtnia  School  Laws,  1915,  p.  7.  Sec.  8. 

'Delaware,  1919,  p.  60,  Sec.  137. 

»New  Hampshire,  p.  5,  Sec.  9-7. 

«Penn.,  The  School  Law,  1919,  p.  73,  Sec.  1141. 


46      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


__  „„„„.„„„,.  1 

fl  £  ,S  *  ,S  5      o  3      ppppoppp      OOOOOPPO.SPOOPPO     -d 
SgWBWcQ     cQm     wcdttSMMMM      P3P5  «  CQ  UB  «  P3  co  05  «  «  pq  «  pj      go 


t;  a 


coco        .      CM      oopujeo  1 

^     OOrHrH   rH      I    »-" 
jStH  | 


"C  10  "O  "8  •O  fl  "O  "O   T3  T3  "O  -O  "O  >B  T3  "O  W  m  m  -a  13  "O  *O  "O  "O 

ECCCjCEEE      ECCcCECw      CCC%%%Iji< 


,,_    333C33^33333a333t,33333PS  .  U  -  ^ 

o,  a  a  a  a  3  a  a£"  a  a  a  a  a  3  a  a  at*  a  a  ft  a  a  a  a  a  aaaa 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  47 


fc 

I 

•0 

> 

•a 

i« 
i* 

i 

00 

pj 

^sj 

o                                       • 

J| 

-S 

i-T 

ft 

EH 

6                                5 

a 

3  1- 

«e> 

g 

*«                             ™ 

I 

rfrH 

a 

rH 

O 

c^§     g  1  i  I  I  i  i  1 

«  7  -        n     ramaMfflm  n 

& 

'a 

I2' 

t^ 

H 

05 
t-( 

ea 

^ 

c  ^ 

to 

O 

f 

O 

® 

o*x 

a 

O 

c  §^,  j,     ^     'j1             N     « 

a 

"rt 

a 

K 

p 
o 

|^  '      SJ,  ^  rt  Ji 

3*J 

at 
'ft 

01  2 

a  a 
o  0 
5  * 

CO 

"5 

EH 

00  a   . 

a 

B-o 
•o  « 

• 

A 

O 

§ 

S    .  S      SSSrtea*SrtS 

b 

*J 

I 

<D 

S 

>m(§      l§m(§(§m"tJmm*'^ 

** 

tK) 

,. 

pw         w  n  raw  w  CQ  cppq  H  ^ 

^ 

<D 

o 

—  . 

EH 

ffl 

a 

>  ~ 

0) 

g 

z 

w 

•S 

^ 

® 

* 

H  >4 

P 

~    B 

o 

O 

TEND: 

TERl 

ai                          >o 

^COCOCDCOCOOI        COCOCO^IOcO 

h 

g 

_a 

|| 

hi 

« 

L 

0.00 

ED       °° 

3   if 

1-s 

^    Uti 

E 

B 

a 

®£ 

5° 

S 

0) 

«  . 
as. 

.50 

1  * 

H  K 

c 

.,_, 

m 
—  x> 

ScJ 

a;  ^ 

P  O 

CO   £ 

o 

•-  *     .  t^                               10                                ^O 
^£     ,COO5lO<Ot-     .COCOCOCOt-      . 

o  303                     o                     co 

S 

"3 

+j 

a  a 

|l 

«    « 
•a  en   g 
^       5 

V    I 

l*"*l      K 

3  ^ 

• 

fT«  |Q 

S**"*     O 

_,      OD 

L^ 

9 

•rt  _( 

a       a 

T^ 

% 

•0 

a 

(A 

""  **  H 

"a   ° 

9 

1-1                    g     * 

a 

E 

*  2 

"~  t-  «-• 

N  ;ft 

.    Q 

o  "^ 

X  k   1 

*o                    2     ^      ** 

A 

B 

A 

**  a> 

a  «>  t. 

4)rH      m 

A    >> 

DUCAT] 

•*-''t!"t^*J*JO'*J'ti*J            *JHH»s2-*-» 

o^y^^o  oi^oOocooo  o  o 

o  £ 

CO    CO 

• 
a  >, 

tS 

CO  ^2 

l_  O 
.S-1-' 

perintend 
:0;  Mo., 
mmissiom 

cities  of 
ermlned 

H 

B«  <5 

o   «> 

h 

0 

Q 

illilllllillli 

p 

a  o 

-H   0 

"S      *» 

O     »  CO 

a  _« 

B 

a  g 

*j  « 
§s 

*5  N 

ctf 

O 

S 

"S.^ 

•o 

«•  A  v| 

ft    ? 

n 

~      rt 

a  * 

"S  2 

0) 

§"    3 

HH 

a                          _* 

•I 

ft_c 

|»  o, 

5  |j 

IH 

w 

Ijlslf      -.,1-1^ 

|5- 

^"2  « 

*^ 

«  £^ 

TABL 

M    <t    —    —    O)    »n           Ofl^           Ofl 
c*r.«,J3    z;    *"    rt   Q  —  *  J3  jj   5 

i|l|i|3sl|^l| 

• 

a 

S  ^ 
Ccn 

e|2 

^-  >^c( 

4$      LEGAt  STATUS  Otf  CITY  SCHOOt  SUPERINTENDENT 

With  the  exceptions  noted  in  Table  II  the  power  to 
remove  the  superintendent  is  vested  in  the  city  board  of 
education.  In  South  Dakota  "he  holds  his  office  during 
the  pleasure  of  the  board.'"  In  Utah  he  "may  be  re- 
moved from  his  office  for  cause  by  the  vote  of  two-thirds 
of  the  board."7  In  Minnesota  "such  removal  must  be  by 
a  concurrent  vote  of  at  least  four  members,  at  a  meeting 
of  whose  time,  place  and  object  he  has  been  duly  noti- 
fied, with  the  reasons  of  such  proposed  removal,  and  after 
an  opportunity  to  be  heard  in  his  own  defense."8  In 
Massachusetts  his  removal  from  office  must  be  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote  of  the  full  membership  of  the  committee  (city 
board  of  education)  and  "with  the  consent  of  the  (State) 
board  of  education  to  such  dismissal."9  In  Virginia  he 
may  be  removed  by  the  state  board  of  education  "for 
cause  and  upon  notice."10 

The  Montana  law  contains  a  tenure  provision  for  the 
superintendent — "provided,  that  after  his  successive  em- 
ployment he  shall  be  deemed  elected  from  term  to  term 
of  three  years  each,  thereafter,  unless  the  board  of  trus- 
tees shall  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  of  its  members  give 
notice  to  such  superintendent  on  or  before  the  first  of 
February  of  the  last  year  of  the  term  of  his  employment 
that  his  services_will  not  be  required  for  the  ensuing 
term."11 


•South  Dakota 
7Utah  School  L 
'Minnesota,  191 
"Massachusetts, 
"Virginia,  191 
llMontana  Scho 


STATUS  Of  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  4Q 

RELATIONSHIPS   OF   BOARD  OF   EDUCATION     AND     SUPERIN- 
TENDENT IN  THE  EXERCISE  Of  CERTAIN 
ADMINISTRATIVE  FUNCTIONS 

An  examination  of  the  general  laws  shows  five  funda- 
mental conceptions  of  the  relationship  that  a  superin- 
tendent should  bear  to  the  board  of  education  in  the  exer- 
cise of  the  various  functions  of  school  administration. 

(1)  First,  the  responsibility  for  the  exercise  of  the  func- 
tion is  vested  solely  in  the  board  of  education  which  body 
has  the  privilege  or  is  required  to  elect  a  superintendent 
who  shall  "have  a  general  supervision  of  the  schools .... 
subject  to  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  board."1    This 
relationship  is  expressed  by  the  figure  I  in  Chart  A ;  and 
is  the  first  step  removed  from  the  legislation  which  recog- 
nized only  the  one  teacher  school  and  the  "committee  of 
householders'"    responsible    for   the   conduct    of   school 
affairs. 

(2)  A  second  fundamental  concept  is  that  the  super- 
intendent should  be  the  expert  adviser  to  the  board  of 
education.     This  takes  two  forms.     The  first  form  sug- 
gests the  right  of  the  board  to  call  on  the  superintendent 
for  assistance  or  advice.     The  following  from  the  Rhode 
Island  Law  is  illustrative — "The  superintendent  shall  give 
the  school  committee  such  assistance  as  it  may  direct  in 
keeping  its  records  and  accounts  and  in  making  such  re- 
ports as  ar^required  by«l^;;*" 

The  Other '  form  ^dteots  the  right  of  the  superin- 
tendent to  advise;  In  &''fe\v  states  the  right  to  advise  ap- 
plies to'all  function^/. vested  in  the  board.  The  Pennsyl- 
vania law  is  typicAl^/The  district  superintendent  shall 
have  a  seat ! in' the ''board  of  school  directors  of  the  dis- 
trict and  the  right  id  speak -on  air  matters  before  the 

'South  Dakota,   1918.  p. '93,   Sec.   204. 
'Chapter'  11,  p.  24,  The  Ohio  Law  of  1821. 
!Rhode  Island,  1918,  p.  6,  Chapter  1667.  Sec.  1, 


5O      LEGAL  STATUS  OP  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
TABLE  III.      POWERS  AND  DUTIES  Of  THE  SUPERINTENDENT 

Enumerating  functions  in  which  the  superintendent  is  legally 
permitted  or  required  to  advise  the  board  of  education :  the  board 
is  in  no  way  obligated  to  follow  the  advice. 

FUNCTIONS  STATES 

Attendance,  Enforcement  of 

Compulsory    Laws Me.,     Mass.,     Mont,     N.     H., 

Okla.,  Oreg.,  S.  Car.,  S. 
Dak.,  Ut.,  Vt.,  Wash.,  Wis., 
Wyo. 

Budget,   Preparation  of Me.,  Penn. 

Course  of  Study,  Preparation 

of     Ky.,    Mass.,    Mich.,    Miss.,    N. 

Dak.,  Penn.,  R.  I.,  Wis. 
Other  Employees 

Appointment     N.   T.,  N.   C. 

Dismissal     N.  H.,  N.  J. 

Medical  Inspection,  Provision 

for   N.  D.,  R.  I. 

Organization  of   Schools Mich.,  N.  J.,  Ohio 

Reports :  to  County  and  State 

Authorities     111.,  R.  I. 

To    Public Mass. 

Supervision  of : 

Schools  in  general Mass.,  R.  I. 

Supplies  :   Selection   of Vt,  Wash.,  Wis.,  Wyo. 

Textbooks     Idaho,  Iowa,  Mass.,   Mich.,  N. 

D.,  R.  I. 

Instructional     Penn.,  R.  I.,  Vt. 

Other    Penn.,  R.  I.,  Vt. 

Teachers 

Examination     Kans.,  N.  J.,  Ore.,  S.  D.,  Ut, 

Wash. 

Certification Kans.,  N.  J.,  Ore.,  S.  D.,  Wash. 

Appointment     Conn.,  La.,  Mass.,  Mich.,  N.  J., 

N.  D.,  Penn.,  R.  I.,  W.  Va. 

Transfer    N.  J.,  Penn. 

Promotion     ' N.  D.,  Penn. 

Dismissal     La.,  Mich.,  N.  H.,  N.  J.,  Ohio, 

Ore.,  Penn. 


JMust   have    the    approval    of   the    superintendent.      Pennsylvania,    1919. 
p.  104,  See.  1607  (b). 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  51 

board,  but  not  to  vote."1  Table  III  enumerates  certain 
functions  and  names  the  states  which  specifically  recog- 
nize the  advisory  duties  of  the  superintendent  in  the 
exercise  of  those  functions. 

(3)  A  third  conception  of  relationship  between  the 
board  and  the  superintendent  differentiates  their  duties 
and   powers   on   the  basis   of   responsibility   for   official 
initiative  in  the  exercise  of  certain  functions.     The  in- 
tent of  the  law  seems  to  be  that,  in  these  cases,  the  power 
of  official  initiative  should  be  denied  to  the  board;  and 
there  is  a  growing-  tendency  to  safeguard  the  superin- 
tendent's position  by  expressly  stating  in  the  law  a  denial 
of  the  board's  right  to  initiate.     Table  IV  indicates  the 
extent  to  which  the  principle  has  been  written  into  the 
statutory  law. 

(4)  Table  V  shows  that  there  are  a  few  functions  for 
the  exercise  of  which  the  superintendent  is  responsible 
and  over  which  the  local  board  has  little  or  no  control 
whatsoever.    In  these  cases,  the  superintendent  is  directly 
responsible  to  a  centralized  state  authority.     An  interest- 
ing development  of  this  principle,  not  indicated  in  Table 
V,  is  taking  place  in  the  New  England  States,  which,  in 
certain  classes  of  districts,  have  made  the  local  superin- 
tendent in  some  sense  a  state  official.     The  following 
from  the  Vermont  Law  is  indicative  of  the  operation  of 
the  principle.1 

"The  Superintendent  shall  ascertain  whether  the  re- 
quirements of  this  chapter  relating  to  the  appropriations 
and  expenditure  of  money  from  the  town  treasury  for  the 
support  of  schools  under  his  charge  are  complied  with; 
and,  in  case  of  noncompliance,  he  shall  bring  the  matter 
to  the  attention  of  the  state's  attorney  or  grand  jury." 

'Pennsylvania,  1917,  p.  71,  Sec.  1142. 
»Vermont,  1915,  p.  34,  Sec.  171. 


52      LEGAL  STATUS  Ol-'  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


TABLE  iv.    POWERS  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  SUPERINTENDENT 

Enumerating  those  functions  in  the  exercise  of  which  the 
power  of  official  initiative  is  vested  in  the  superintendent:  the 
board's  responsibility  being  confined  to  action  upon  the  super- 
intendent's recommendations. 

FUNCTIONS  STATES 

Attendance,    Enforcing    Com- 
pulsory  Attendance  Laws Ind.,  Kans.,  Mich.,  N.  J.,  N.  Y. 

N.  C,  Pa.,  Tenn.,  Tex.,  W.  Va. 
Appointment  of 

Attendance  Officers   . .  4. Del.,  Ky.,  Tenn. 

Teachers    Del.,  Ky.,  Me.,  N.  H.,  N.  Y.,  O. 

Other    Employees Del.,  Ky.,  N.  H. 

Budget,   Preparation   of Del. 

Building  Plans,   Preparation   of.. Del. 
Course  of  Study,  Preparation  of.. Del.,  X.  Y. 

Pupils,  Suspension  of Idaho,     Kans.,      Ky.,      Mont., 

Tenn.,  Vt,  Wash. 
Reports  to 

State  or  County  Authorities Del.,  Miss. 

Public Del.,  Conn.,  Ky.,  La.,  Vt. 

Supervision 

General  Supervision  of  Schools.  N.   H.,   N.   Y.,   N.   C.,   N.   D., 

Ohio,  S.  D.,  Va.,  W.  Va., 
Cal.,  Del.,  Kans.,  Ky.,  Mich., 
Mont,  Nev. 

Of  Classroom  Instruction Del.,  Ky.,  N.  H.,  N.  Y.,  N.  C, 

Ohio 
Supplies :  Selection  of 

Textbooks   Del.,  Ky.,  Me.,  N.  Y.,  Pa. 

Instructional     Del.,  Ky.,  Me.,  N.  Y. 

Other   Supplies    Del.,   Me. 

Teachers 

Examination     Ark.,  Ky.,  N.  Y.,  Ohio,  Okla., 

Wis. 

Certification    Ark.,  Ky.,  N.  Y.,  Ohio,  Okla., 

Wis. 

Transfer    Del.,  Ky.,  N.  Y.,  W.  Va. 

Promotion     Del.,  Ky. 

Suspension,  Dismissal Del.,  Ky.,  Mass.,  N.  Y. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  53 

TABLE    V.      POWERS     AND    DUTIES    OF    THE    SUPERINTENDENT 

Enumerating  those  powers  and  duties  delegated  by  the  various 
states  to  the  superintendent :  the  intent  of  the  law  apparently  be- 
ing that  in  these  matters  the  superintendent  should  be  respon- 
sible to  a  state  authority  and  not  to  the  board  of  education. 

FUNCTIONS  STATES 

Directing  the  activities  of  at- 
tendance officers Conn.,  Ky. 

Taking   the   Census Ala.,  Del.,  Me. 

Enforcing  Compulsory  at- 
tendance laws Del.,  Idaho,  111.,  Ky.,  Minn. 

Granting  Working   Papers Ala.,   Ark.,   Ariz.,   Cal.,   Conn., 

Ind.,  Kans,  Ky.,  Me.,  Mass., 
Mich.,  Minn.,  Mo.,  Mont., 
Neb.,  N.  H.,  N.  Y.,  N.  D., 
Ohio,  Pa.,  Vt,  Wash.,  W.  Va. 

Reports  to  County  Authorities Minn.,    Mont.,    N.    J.,    N.    C., 

Wash. 

Reports   to    State   Authorities La.,  Me.,  Mass.,  Mich.,  Minn., 

N.  H.,  N.  J.,  N.  C.,  Pa., 
Tex.,  Va.,  Vt,  Wash,  W. 
Va.,  Wis.,  Wyo. 

Reports  to  Public Me. 

Examination  and  certifica- 
tions of  teachers  (local 
service  only)  Pa.,  Wis. 

Transfer  of  Teachers Va. 

Another  illustration  is,  "...  .The  superintendent  may  give 
written  permission  to  a  teacher  to  dismiss  school  for  not 
more  than  two  days  whenever  such  dismissal  seems  to 
him  necessary  or  proper."1 

(5)  A  fifth  relationship,  that  is,  vesting  the  power  of 
veto  or  approval  over  the  actions  of  the  board  of  educa- 
tion in  the  office  of  the  superintendent,  finds  little  place 
in  the  general  school  law  of  the  various  states.  It  would 
seem  that  this  principle  could  actually  operate  only  in 
those  states  where  the  superintendent's  tenure  is  largely 
beyond  the  control  of  the  board  of  education. 


Vermont.  1915,  p.  22,  Sec.   111. 


54      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

RELATIONSHIPS    OF    THE    PUBLIC    TO    THEIR    CITY    SCHOOL 
OFFICIALS 

The  older  law  gave  the  public  a  very  large  control  over 
the  conduct  of  their  school  officials.  As  the  New  England 
influence  moved  westward,  the  town  meeting  became  the 
annual  school  meeting  and  still  holds  a  place  in  the  law, 
particularly,  in  the  law  applicable  to  rural  and  village 
schools.1  Table  VI  shows  a  few  remaining  influences  of 
the  earlier  democratic  control. 

TABLE    VI.      POWERS    OF    VETO    AND    APPROVAL    VESTED    IN    THE    PUBLIC 

Enumerating  those  functions,  and  the  states  concerned,  in  the 
exercise  of  which  the  school  authorities  must  submit  their  pro- 
posals to  the  public  for  acceptance  or  rejection  by  popular  vote. 

FUNCTIONS  STATES 

Budget    Ark.,  Me.,   Neb.,  N.   H.,  R.  I. 

Taxation,       Increasing       rate 
above    statutory    limits,    or 

for  some  special  service Kans.,    Ky.,    La.,    Miss.,    Mo., 

Mont.,    Neb.,   N.   C.,   N.   D., 
Ohio,  Okla.,  Pa.,  Tex.,  Utah, 
Wash.,  W.  Va.,  Wyo; 
Buildings   and   Grounds 

Purchase  and  sale  of Ky.,     Mass.,      Mich.,      Minn., 

Mont.,  Neb.,  Nev.,  N.  M., 
Okla.,  Ore.,  R.  I.,  Vt,  Wash., 
Wyo. 

An  interesting  illustration  not  given  in  the  table  is  the 
New  Jersey  law,  applicable  to  all  districts  employing 
supervising  principals,  which  requires  the  board  of  edu- 
cation to  submit  their  annual  estimate  or  budget  to  the 
electors  at  the  annual  meeting.2  A  form  of  immediate 
public  control  that  has  remained  and  in  some  respects 
has  grown  in  favor  is  indicated  in  Table  VII.  This 
influence  is  usually  exercised  through  the  medium  of 
a  petition.  An  illustration  of  this  principle  is  con- 

'For    example    see    Iowa    School    Laws,    1919,    Annual    Meeting,    2829, 

2836,    2837,   2778,    2811,   2746,    2747. 
'New  Jersey,  1918,  p.  54.  Sec.  109. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  55 

TABLE  VII.        INITIATORY  POWERS  OF  THE  PUBLIC 

Enumerating  a  few  functions  illustrative  of  the  three  degrees 
of  action  that  public  initiative,  usually  exercised  through  a  peti- 
tion, may  compel  a  board  of  education  to  take. 

Functions  Initiative  is  Granted  to  the  Public ;  and— 

~2g  "Sc«  "Ss*§ 

£c»i       in     t^i 

^^"S  <i>  u  «  «;=.£ 

PS  ^  o  c  i.  +J.Q  T 

<n   o  — »  rt   c  °e   3 

~  S  -  -2      .o  ."Sg/3 

CJ     ^  -•-»  '     i  »"  [— 

I**  1*f  !S~ 

«2«  JUs        Sail 

Establishment  of  Eve- 
ing  Schools Ind.  O.,  Pa.,  N.  H.  la.  Wis. 

Purchase  or  Sale  of 
grounds  Mont. 

Establishment  of  Com- 
munity Centers  or 
Use  of  Schools  for 
Community  Center 
Work N.  H.  Ind.,  Mich.,  Ohio  Wis.  Okla 

tained  in  the  Missouri  law: — "Special  school  meetings 
for  the  transaction  of  business  authorized, ....  Shall  be 
called  by  the  board  when  a  majority  of  the  qualified  vo- 
ters of  the  district  sign  a  petition  requesting  the  same, 
and  designating  the  purpose  therein  for  which  said  meet- 
ing is  desired."1  In  most  cases  a  petition  from  a  much 
smaller  proportion  of  the  voters  registered  at  the  last 
general  election  is  sufficient  to  require  action  by  the 
board ;  in  New  Jersey  a  petition  signed  by  50  voters  can 
bring  action  on  any  matter  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
board;1  in  other  cases  five  per  cent,  of  the  voters,'  10  of 
the  legal  voters,4  "15  per  cent,  of  the  qualified  electors"* 
.  . .  .are  sufficient. 


•Missouri.     Revised  Statutes  1909,  Vol.  3,  Ch.  106,  p.  3351,  Sec.  10799. 
'New  Jersey,  1918,  p.  68,  Sec.   116X. 
'Illinois,  1919,  p.   36,  Sec.   1-2. 
'Colorado,  1917,  p.  62,  Sec.  123. 
Connecticut,  1916,  p.  64,  Sec.  205. 


56      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

TAItI.E   VIII.      METHODS  OF  KEEPING  THE  PUBUC   INFORMED   IN   REGARD 
TO   THE   WORK   OF    THEIR   BOARD    OF    EDUCATION 

Code  for  Interpretation  of  Table 

1.  The  exercise  of  the  function  is  required  of  the  board. 

2.  Required  of  the  board  with  the  advice  of  the  superintendent. 

3.  Required  of   the   superintendent   subject  to   the   approval   of 

the  board. 
Required  of  the  superintendent. 


4- 


13 

at     • 

s  w 

•gs 

0 

u    C 
«  cu 
o  — 
PQO 

•o    • 

-   u 
0;S 

l"§ 

o 

Ig 

o  o. 

Publicat  ion  of 
Official  Proceed- 
ings   

Board   Required   to   Report   to 
the    Public    (usually     in     pub- 
sv              lished    form) 

•3*8 

.   t> 
£  M 

1« 

en 

Condition 
or  Prog- 
ress of 
Schools 

Proposed 
[Policies 

Alabama 

Arizona 

,  1 

Arkansas 

.. 

California 

i 

i 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

i 

Delaware 

Idaho 

Illinois 

.. 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

i 

Louisiana 

4 

:i 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

i 

i 

Minnesota 

i 

i 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

i 

Nebraska               i 

Nevada 

i 

New  Hampshire  .. 

New  Jersey           1 

New  Mexico 

New  York              1 

North  Dakota 

i 

Ohio 

i 

Oklahoma 

i 

Oregon 

i 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island 

i 

South   Carolina   .. 

i 

South  Dakota 

i 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

i 

STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  57 

TABLE    IX.      VETO    AND    APPROVAL    POWERS    VESTED    IN    MUNICIPAL 
AUTHORITIES 

Enumerating  functions  in  the  exercise  of  which  the  power  of 
veto  and  approval  is  vested  by  certain  states  in  municipal  civil 
authorities. 

FUNCTIONS  STATE 

Buildings  and  grounds 

Purchase  and  Sale  of Me.,  N.  H.,  N.  J.,  N.  Y.,  Tex., 

Va.,  Wis. 

Plans   for   New   Construction.  .Mass.,  N.  H.,  N.  Y.,  Wis. 

Rent  and  Repairs  Wis. 

Budget,  Approval Mich.,  Miss.,  N.  J.,  N.  Y.,  Vt., 

Va.,  Wis. 

The  present  tendency,  however,  seems  to  be  toward 
leaving  all  responsibility  of  management  to  school  officials, 
and  of  devising  ways  whereby  these  officials  may  be  re- 
sponsive to  the  public  will.  One  means  of  keeping  of- 
ficials close  to  the  public  is  to  keep  the  public  closely  in- 
formed of  their  action.  Table  VIII  shows  the  four  chief 
methods  utilized  in  the  law  for  keeping  the  public  in- 
formed of  the  actions  of  their  school  officials ;  the  table 
also  shows  the  responsibility  resting  on  the  superintendent 
in  this  matter. 

RELATIONSHIPS  OF   SCHOOL  OFFICIALS   TO   CIVIL   AUTHORI- 
TIES  OF   THE    CITY 

The  control  of  school  functions  vested,  by  the  earlier 
law,  in  municipal  civil  authorities  has  largely  disappeared  ; 
and  is  altogether  confined  to  matters  of  the  budget  and 
property.  Tennessee  is  the  only  state  which  still  vests 
the  chief  control  of  these  two  functions  in  the  board  of 
mayor  and  aldermen.'  Table  IX  names  those  states 
which  make  action  of  the  board  of  education  subject  to 
the  approval  of  the  city  municipal  authorities  in  matters 
pertaining  to  the  budget  and  to  buildings  and  grounds. 

•Tennessee,  1920.  Sec.  52,  sub.  sec.  2   (p.  46). 


58      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

TABLE  X.      THE  COUNTY  SUPERINTENDENT  AND  CITY  SCHOOL 
ADMINISTRATION 

Naming  states  in  which  certain  acts  of  city  school  officials 
are  not  valid  until  approved  by  the  county  superintendent  of 
schools. 

FUNCTIONS  STATE 

Attendance 

Taking  the  census Ind.,  Nev.,  Okla.,  S.  C.,  Tenn., 

Texas. 

Enforcement  of  Compulsory 

Attendance    Laws Minn.,  Wyo. 

Buildings 

Plans  for  new  construction. ..  .Iowa,  W.  Va. 
Teachers 

Examination    and    Certifica- 
tion     Ore. 

Dismissal  Mont.,  S.  C.,  Texas. 

RELATIONSHIPS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  OFFICIALS  TO  COUNTY  AND 
STATE  AUTHORITIES 

In  the  smaller  cities  of  many  states  county  officials  still 
have  some  control  of  certain  functions  of  city  school 
administration.  This  control  is  indicated  in  Table  X; 
and  is  usually  coincident  with  the  theory  that  the  county 
superintendent  is  an  official  of  the  state  responsible  for 
the  administration  of  certain  school  functions  in  a  par- 
ticular subdivision  of  the  state. 

State  control  of  city  school  administration  takes  two 
distinct  forms.  In  the  first,  indicated  by  Table  XI,  the 
city  school  officials  have  the  power  of  initiative,  and  the 
centralized  state  authority  is  vested  with  the  power  of 
veto  or  approval. 

In  a  rare  and  extreme  form,  Table  XII,  the  central- 
ized state  authority  is  vested  with  complete  control  of  the 
respective  function;  and  the  only  privilege  of  the  local 
officials  is  the  obligation  to  carry  out  instructions  re- 
ceived. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  59 


TABLE  XI.     POWERS  OF  VETO  AND  APPROVAL  VESTED  IX  A  CENTRALIZED 
STATE  AUTHORITY 

'  Naming  states  in  which  the  acts  of  local  officials  in  the  exer- 
cise of  certain  functions  are  not  valid  until  approved  by  a  cen- 
tralized state  authority.  In  a  few  cases  the  act  of  the  local 
officials  is  valid  unless  overruled — usually  as  the  result  of  an 
appeal — by  a  state  authority. 

STATES        WHICH        CONTROL 
THROUGH       A       CENTRALIZED 
FUNCTION  STATE    OFFICIAL 

Attendance, 

Taking  of  Census Me.,  R.  I. 

Enforcement    of    Compulsory 

Attendance   Laws X.  H.,  X.  J.,  N.  Y. 

Buildings, 

Plans  for  New  Construction. .  .Kans.,  La.,  Me.,  Mich.,  Mont, 

Xev.,  X.  Mex.,  X.  C,  Ohio, 
Ore.,  S.  Dak.,  Tex. 

Course  of  Study X.  J.,  Ohio,  R.  I.,  Tex.,  Va., 

Wash. 

Medical    Inspection N.  H.,  N.  C,  Ohio,  R.  I.,  Wyo. 

Evening  Schools,  Establishment 

of    Me.,  Xev.,  X.  H.,  N.  J.,  R  I., 

Utah,  Va. 
Day-Continuation  Schools, 

Establishment    of Mass.,  N.  H.,  N.  J.,  Ore.,  R-  I., 

Utah 
Special  Classes 

Establishment    of Mass.,     Mich.,     Minn.,     Ohio, 

Penn.,  Wis. 

Selection   of  Text-books Miss.,  Ore.,  Wyo. 

Teachers 
Examination  and  Certification.  .Ark.,  Ky.,  X.  J.,  N.  Y.,  Pa. 

Dismissal  N.  H.,  Ore,  Tex.,  W.  Vra. 

Superintendent 

Appointment    Del.,  X.  H.,  Pa. 

Dismissal  Del.,  Ore,  W.  Va. 


6O      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

TABLE    XII.      POWERS    VESTED    SOLELY    IN    A    CENTRALIZED    STATE 
AUTHORITY 

Functions   of  local  administration   over  which  the  centralized 
state  authority  has  full  control  in  the  states  named. 

Course   of    Study Kans.,  La.,  Mont,  Nebr.,  Nev., 

N.   H.,   N.   Hex.,  N.  C.,   N. 
Dak.,    Okla.,    Tenn.,    Vt.   W. 
The  Superintendent's  Va.,  Wyo. 

Appointment  Va. 

Dismissal     Va.,  N.  H. 

Selection  of  Text-books Ariz.,  Ind.,  Kans.,  La.,  Monb, 

Nev.,  N.  Mex.,  Okla.,  Tenn., 
Tex.,  Va.,  W.  Va. 

Examination  and  Certification  Ariz.,  Del.,  Idaho,  111.,  Iowa, 

of  Teachers  La.,  Mo.,  Minn.,  Nev.,  N.  H., 

N.  Mex.,  N.  Dak.,  R.  I., 
Tenn.,  Vt.,  Va.,  W.  Va.,  Wyo. 

RESPONSIBILITY  OF  THE  SUPERINTENDENT  AS  SPECIFIED  IN 
THE  LAW  FOR  THE  EXERCISE  OF  CERTAIN  FUNCTIONS 

Tables  III,  IV  and  V  indicate  the  extent  to  which  the 
law  of  the  different  states  recognizes  the  city  superin- 
tendent as  a  school  official.  An  examination  of  the  pro- 
visions made  by  different  states  for  the  exercise  of  cer- 
tain administrative  functions  throws  additional  light  on 
the  legal  status  of  the  city  school  superintendent.  These 
functions  will  be  treated  in  the  order  they  are  given  in 
Chart  A. 

Attendance 

The  Wyoming  law  places  the  responsibility  of  enforc- 
ing the  compulsory  attendance  law  upon  the  "sheriff  of 
ever}'  county,"  upon  the  deputy  sheriff,  and  upon  the 
"constables  within  their  respective  precincts  ;"a  but  it  also 
provides  that  the  school  board  of  any  district  containing 
a  city  or  town  of  more  than  2,500  inhabitants  may  appoint 
a  regular  truant  officer,  "who  shall  be  paid — not  ex- 
ceeding— the  sum  of  four  dollars  for  each  day  of  actual 


•Wyoming,  1919,  p.  44.  Sec.  132. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES     Ol 

service."  In  Kentucky  "all  applicants  for  the  position 
of  truant  officer  shall  be  examined  by  the  superintendent 
of  schools,  who  shall  certify  to  the  board  of  education, 
only  such  persons  qualified  as  herein  provided."  All 
appointments,  promotions  and  transfers  of  truant  officers 
— shall  be  made  only  upon  the  recommendation  of  the 
superintendent  and  the  approval  of  the  board.3  And 
further,  "such  truant  officers  shall  be  under  the  direct 
supervision  and  control  of  the  city  superintendent  of 
schools."4 

The  Wyoming  law  attempts  to  meet  the  situation  in  a 
new  and  sparsely  populated  state,  where  cities  have 
scarcely  developed ;  and  the  need  for  strong  city  super- 
intendents has  not  made  itself  felt  in  legislative  halls.  The 
Kentucky  law  recognizes  the  enforcement  of  compulsory 
attendance  laws  as  a  basic  principle  of  public  education 
and  centers  the  authority  and  rseponsibility  for  their  en- 
forcement in  the  office  of  the  city  superintendent.  The 
right  of  the  state  in  this  matter  is  seen  in  the  Oklahoma 
law  which  empowers  the  state  board  of  education  "to 
supervise  such  city  district.  . .  .truancy  officer  and  to  re- 
move any  incumbent  of  such  office  upon  satisfactory  proof 
of  his  incompetency  or  failure  to  enforce  the  compulsory 
education  law."5 

Responsibility  for  taking  the  census  is  usually  vested 
in  the  board  of  education ;  often  it  is  specifically  delegated 
to  the  clerk  or  secretary  of  the  board.  In  states  which 
have  vested  the  clerical  or  secretarial  duties  of  the  board 
in  the  office  of  the  superintendent  the  latter  official  has 
usually  been  required  as  in  the  Alabama  law  to  attend 
to  the  taking  of  the  school  census."  '  New  York,  in  cities 


'Kentucky,   1918,  p.   258,   Sec.   582. 
"Tbirt.      p.    212,   Sec.   466. 
«Fbid.     p.  259.  Pec.   585 
"Oklahoma,   1919.   p-   51,   Sec.   252. 
•Alabama,   191f>.   p.    132 


62      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

of  the  2nd  and  3rd  classes,  has  constituted  the  board  of 
education  a  permanent  census  board  and  has  made  the 
police  responsible  for  recording  a  continuous  census:7  in 
cities  of  the  first  class  (New  York  excepted)  the  mayor, 
superintendent  of  school  and  police  commissioner  con- 
stitute the  census  board. 

The  authority  to  excuse  children  from  the  requirements 
of  the  compulsory  attendance  law,  to  grant  working 
papers,  and  to  decide  when  home  instruction  is  satisfac- 
tory, are,  in  the  majority  of  states,  vested  either  alto- 
gether in  the  superintendent  or  in  the  superintendent  sub- 
ject to  the  board's  approval.  The  authority  to  grant 
working  papers  is  usually  specifically  provided  for:  The 
Pennsylvania  law  is  typical:  it  provides,8  "That  any  dis- 
trict superintendent  .  .  .  hereby  authorized  to  issue  such 
certificates  may  authorize  and  deputize,  in  writing,  any 
other  school  official  to  act  in  his  stead  for  the  purpose  of 
issuing  such  certificates." 

The  Budget 

The  power  of  initiative  in  budget  making  or  prepara- 
tion of  the  estimate  is,  with  two  exceptions,  vested  in  the 
board  of  education.  Tennessee  vests  the  sole  authority 
for  budget  making  in  the  board  of  mayor  and  aldermen, 
while  Delaware  places  the  power  of  initiative  in  the 
office  of  the  superintendent  with  the  power  of  approval 
resting  in  the  board  of  education.  Table  IX  shows  the 
authority  of  municipal  civil  authorities  in  veto  or  ap- 
proval of  the  budget;  and  Table  VI  shows  the  extent  to 
which  this  same  power  is  vested  in  the  electorate.  Chart 
A  shows  the  extent  to  which  the  states  have  vested  the 
powers  of  preparation  of  estimates  and  levying  of  the 
school  tax  solely  within  the  board  of  education.  The 


York,  1918,  p.  200-202.  Sec.  650-652. 
•Pennsylvania,  1919,  p.  172,  Sec.  3608. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES     63 

Oregon  law  suggests  a  means  whereby  this  authority  may 
be  vested  in  elected  school  officials  and  the  power  of  pub- 
lic opinion  still  operate  to  reproduce  the  best  results  for 
the  schools.  It  provides  that  a  public  meeting  shall  be 
called  by  the  board  within  30  days  after  the  preparation 
of  the  budget,  that  notice  of  said  meeting  including  copy 
of  the  budget  shall  be  published  in  a  newspaper  of  the 
district  having  a  general  circulation ;  and  that  "Any  legal 
school  elector  of  said  district  may  attend  such  meeting 
and  shall  be  accorded  a  hearing  on  any  item  on  such 
budget.1 

Buildings  and  Grounds 

The  laws  indicate  three  distinct  phases  of  responsibility 
that  have  been  placed  on  the  superintendent  in  connection 
with  buildings  and  grounds.  He  may  or  shall  advise1 
the  board  as  to  repairs,  rent,  insurance,  purchase,  sales, 
plans  for  new  construction  and  in  the  supervision  of  con- 
struction. 

In  a  few  states  no  school  building  can  be  erected  until 
the  city  superintendent  has  approved  the  plans.1  The 
Texas  law  is  typical, — "In  a  city  or  town  that  has  as- 
sumed control  of  its  schools,  the  superintendent  of  public 
schools  in  that  district  or  city  or  town  is  hereby  author- 
ized, empowered  and  required  to  examine  all  plans  for 
all  proposed  public  school  buildings  costing  over  $400, 
and  to  grant  permits  only  for  such  buildings,  as  conform 
to  the  requirements  of  this  act,  and  to  make  a  report  to 
the  State  Department  of  Education  of  all  such  permits 
granted,  transmitting  all  evidence." 

Two  underlying  principles  are  implied  in  the  above 
clause ;  first,  that  when  a  city  assumes  control  of  its 

'Oregon,   1919,  p.  97,   Sec.  301. 
'See  Table  III. 

'Texas,    1917,    pp.    68-69,    Sec.    153.      Virginia,    1915,    p.    155,    Sec.    198, 
tenth  Louisiana,  1916,  p.  104,  Sec.  250. 


64      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

schools,  the  city  superintendent  automatically  assumes 
the  powers  and  duties  for  his  district  of  a  county  super- 
intendent and  so  becomes  a  state  official  ;*  second,  as  the 
chief  local  official  of  the  schools,  the  city  superintendent 
is  responsible  to  the  centralized  state  authority  for  all 
transactions  under  this  law.  The  Virginia  law  carries 
the  principle  further,  and  empowers  the  superintendent 
to  condemn  school  buildings  and  to  forbid  holding  school 
in  same  until  such  time  as  he  "shall  certify  in  writing,  to 
the  city  school  board,  that  he  is  satisfied  with  the  con- 
dition of  such  building  and  with  the  appliances  pertain- 
ing thereto.* 

The  Delaware  code  reverses  the  process,  placing  the 
power  of  initiative  in  the  office  of  the  superintendent,  and 
the  power  of  approval  in  the  board  of  education."  This 
principle  holds  in  all  transactions  concerning  buildings 
and  grounds.  In  preparation  of  plans  for  new  construc- 
tion, the  power  of  final  approval  is  vested  in  the  cen- 
tralized state  authority.7 

Kentucky,  Ohio,  Michigan  and  New  Jersey  permit 
city  boards  of  education  to  employ  a  second  executive 
officer  usually  known  as  "business  manager"  and  to 
delegate  to  him  the  execution  of  all  powers  and  duties 
that  are  vested  by  law  in  the  board  of  education  relative 
to  buildings  and  grounds.  In  a  few  other  states  these 
functions  may  be  delegated  to  the  secretary8  or  clerk 
of  the  board;  usually  the  law  specifies  that  he  shall  not 
be  a  member  of  that  body. 

Course  of  Study 

In  preparation  of  the  course  of  study  there  is  a  decided 

*See  opinion  of  Supreme  Court,  p.  41. 

8Virrmia,  p.   155,  Sec.  198  tenth. 

•Washington,    1917,  p.   78,  Sec.    241-245.      California,    1915,   p.   83,    Sec 

1657. 

TDelaware,  1919,  p.  62,  Sec.  143. 
'Delaware,   1919,  p.   16,   Sec.   36. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  65 

difference  in  opinion  among  the  various  states  as  to 
whether  this  power  should  be  vested  in  a  centralized 
state  authority  or  in  the  local  board  of  education.1  In 
compromising  the  two  extreme  views,  the  city  superin- 
tendent plays  a  conspicuous  part.  In  Pennsylvania  "The 
board  of  school  directors,  .with  the  advice,  assistance  and 
approval  of  the  proper  superintendent  of  schools,  shall 

arrange  a  course  or  courses  of  study These  courses 

of  study  shall  conform  to  any  general  course  of  study 
arranged  by  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction, 
so  far  as  the  local  conditions.  . .  .permit.'"  In  the  Wash- 
ington law  the  superintendent  rather  than  the  board  pre- 
pares the  course.  The  law  reads  "It  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  superintendent ....  to  prepare  and  issue  under  the 
direction  of  the  board  of  school  directors.  . .  .a  course  of 
study  for  his  schools,  which  course  of  study  must  before 
going  into  effect,  be  approved  by  the  state  superintendent 
of  public  instruction.1 

The  New  York  law  provides  that  the  superintendent 
shall  "prepare  the  content  of  each  course  of  study  au- 
thorized by  the  board  of  education"  and  submit  the 
same  to  the  board  of  education  for  its  approval.* 

Wyoming  has  recognized  the  desirability  of  giving  the 
local  community  a  partial  control  over  its  course  of  study  ; 
and  has  vested  this  local  control  solely  in  the  superin- 
tendent. After  providing  that  the  meeting  of  the  State 
Teachers'  Institute  shall  determine  the  course  of  study 
and  that  the  superintendent  of  public  instruction  shall 
have  the  power  to  carry  the  determination  of  the  institute 
into  effect,  the  law  provides,  "That  a  principal  or  super- 
intendent of  schools  in  any  district  who  has  supervision 

•See  Chart  A. 

Pennsylvania,   1917,  p.  96,  Sec.   1698. 
•Washington,  1917,  p.  107,  Sec.  333. 
•New  York,  1918,  p.  241,  Sec.  870-2. 


66      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

over  three  or  more  teachers  may  amend  and  change  the 
course  of  study  prescribed  by  the  State  Superintendent 
of  Public  Instruction  in  such  manner  as  will,  in  his  judg- 
ment, apply  more  directly  to  the  local  conditions  of  such 
district — except  elimination  of  the  prescribed  subjects."" 
A  glance  at  Chart  A  shows  the  strong  influence  of  the 
state  centralized  authority  over  the  city  school  course  of 
study;  and  the  discussion  above  indicates  a  tendency  of 
the  state  to.  exercise  its  influence  through  the  city  super- 
intendent. 

Employees — Janitors,  Clerks,  Etc. 
Many  of  the  state  laws  do  not  specifically  mention  the 
above  named  group  of  employees ;  the  right  to  so  employ 
them  is  granted  to  the  board  of  education  under  some 
general  clause  vesting  the  control  of  the  schools  in  the 
board. 

Where  the  law  vests  the  power  of  appointment  of  em- 
ployees in  an  appointed  executive  official,  it  usually  speci- 
fies that  the  board  shall  determine  the  number  of  posi- 
tions and  the  salaries  to  be  paid.  The  Kentucky  law  is 
typical : 

"Subject  to  the  approval  of  the  board  of  education 
as  to  the  number  and  salaries,  the  business  director 
shall  have  power  to  appoint  such  engineers,  janitors 
and  other  employees  and  agents,  as  may  be  necessary 
for  the  proper  performance  of  the  duties  of  his  de- 
partment, for  whom  he  shall  be  responsible  and  whom 
he  shall  have  power  to  remove.  He  shall  appoint  such 
assistants  and  deputies  as  may  be  authorized  by  the 
board  of  education,  whose  compensation  shall  be  fixed 
by  the  board.'" 

"The  Superintendent  of  Schools.  .  .shall  have  power 
to  appoint  clerks,  whose  number  and  salary  shall  be 

''Wyoming,   1919,   p.   32,   Sec.   92. 

•Kentucky.   1918,   213    (469),   2nd  Class  Cities. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  67 

fixed  by  the  board  and  shall  have  power  to  remove 

same."7 

The  Delaware  code  requires  that  "The  Superintendent 
of  Schools  shall  nominate  in  writing  for  appointment  by 
the  Board  of  Education, — janitors,  and  all  other  regular 
employees  of  the  Board,  shall  assign  to  them  their  posi- 
tions, transfer  them  as  the  needs  of  the  school  require, 
recommend  them  for  promotion,  suspend  them  for  cause, 
and  recommend  them  for  dismissal."8 
Health  Work 

A  number  of  the  states  require  a  state  authority  to 
prepare  rules  and  instructions  for  testing  and  examining 
the  health  of  children ;  and  require  the  teachers  to  do  the 
testing  and  examining;*  and  to  notify  the  parents  of  need 
for  medical  attention.  The  distribution  of  instructions 
and  tests  compiled  by  the  state,  and  the  notification  of  par- 
ents concerning  defects  is  often  required  of  the  city  super- 
intendent.10 This  requirement  of  the  superintendent 
applies  usually,  also,  when  there  is  professional  medical 
inspection.  Sometimes  the  responsibility  of  the  superin- 
tendent is  expressed  in  more  general  phraseology,  as  "It 
shall  be  the  duty  of  the.  . .  .city  superintendent  of  schools 
to  cooperate  with  school  boards  in  promoting  medical 
inspection ;"  1  but  there  is  a  tendency  to  make  the  superin- 
tendent of  schools  responsible  for  the  general  direction  and 
supervision  of  medical  inspectors,  nurses  and  assistants.1 
Pupils — Admission  and  Suspension 

In  connection  with  legal  provisions  concerning  pupils, 
the  question  of  suspension  stands  most  conspicuously.  The 

'Kentucky,    1918,    212    (466). 

'Delaware,   1919,   p.   63.    (2326)    Sec.   147. 

•For   e.   g.,   see :    Nevada,    1919,    p.    157,   sec.    1-3 ;    Utah,    1919,    p.    222, 

Sec.   4546,   p.    923,    Sec.    4550 ;    Wyoming,    1919,   p.    110,    Sec.   345, 

Law  passed  1915. 
"For  e.  g.,  see :  Wyoming,   1919,  p.   Ill,  Sec.   347 ;  Ohio,   1915,  p.   244, 

Sec.  7692-2;  Rhode  Island,  1917,  SI.  p.  2,  Ch.  1484,  Sec.  1. 
'North  Dakota,  1915,  p.  64,  Sec.  1346. 
•New  York,  1918,  pp.  170-174,  Sec.  570-577,  p.  241,  Sec.  870-4. 


68      LEGAL  STATUS  Ol7  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

earlier  law  usually  placed  this  power  in  the  hands  of  the 
teacher,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  board,  and  in  some 
cases  with  power  to  appeal  to  the  county  superintendent 
whose  decision  was  final.3  But  the  tendency  seems  to  be 
to  vest  the  sole  power  of  suspension  in  the  office  of  super- 
intendent, subject  to  the  final  approval  or  disapproval  of 
the  board  of  education.4  The  Nevada  law  makes  the  per- 
manent exclusion  from  the  public  schools  of  a  pupil  of 
compulsory  age  subject  to  the  consent  of  the  state  deputy 
superintendent  of  public  instruction  ;5  and  the  tendency 
generally  is  to  place  the  burden  of  proof  as  to  the  need 
for  suspension  more  heavily  upon  the  city  school  officials.' 

Reports 

Chart  A  and  Table  VIII  show  the  responsibility  of  the 
superintendent  for  making  or  helping  to  make  reports. 
The  two  phases  of  his  reporting  to  the  board  of  education 
are  indicated  in  the  Rhode  Island  law.  "He  (the  super- 
intendent) shall  make  a  report  to  the  school  committee 
annually  and  at  such  other  times  as  it  may  direct."1  This 
second  phase  is  expressed  more  clearly  in  the  Ohio  law, — 
"Such  boards  may  require  superintendent  and  teachers 

to  report  matters  the  board  deem  important "     The 

advisory  phase  of  the  superintendent's  responsibility  is 
expressed  in  the  Massachusetts  law, — "He  (the  super- 
intendent) shall  assist  the  school  committee  in  keeping  its 
records  and  accounts  and  in  making  such  reports  as  are 
required  by  law."9  But  in  an  act  passed  lately  to  provide 
for  the  distribution  of  a  portion  of  the  income  tax,  Massa- 
chusetts has  placed  a  much  heavier  obligation  on  the  su- 

»For  example  see:   Mississippi,   1918,  p.   67,   Sec.  4623    (Code  of  1906); 

Idaho,  1917,  p.  63,  Sec.  86a. 

'Montana,  1917,  pp.  67-68,  Sec.  802  ;  Kansas,  1917,  p.  144,  Sec.  411. 
5Nevada,  1919,  p.  21  Sec.  39-5. 
•Kansas,  1917.  p.  129.  Sec.  360.  Court  Decision. 
'R.  I.,  S.  L.,  1918.  p.  6.  Chap.  1667. 
•Ohio,  1915,  p.  291,  Sec.  7785. 
'Mass.,  1914.  p.  33.  Chap.  444.  Act  Ibll,  sec.  1. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  .69 

perintendent  than  in  the  earlier  law, — He  "shall,  under 
oath,  file  with  the  commissioner  of  education — each 
year — ,  a  statement  containing  such  data  as  may  be  neces- 
sary for  the  purposes  of.  .this  act" 10  The  independ- 
ence of  the  city  superintendent  from  the  county  super- 
intendent in  making  reports  is  indicated  in  the  Wisconsin 
law  which  requires  that  in  all  cities  having  a  city  super- 
intendent of  schools  and  not  under  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
county  superintendent  of  schools,  the  city  superintendent 
shall  make  the  annual  report  required — directly  to  the 
state  superintendent.1 

Table  VIII  indicates  the  responsibility  that  has  been 
placed  on  the  superintendent  for  reporting  to  the  public. 
The  laws  of  Connecticut  and  Maine  illustrate  two  de- 
grees of  this  responsibility : — The  superintendent  "shall, 
one  week  at  least  before  the  annual  town  meeting,  submit 
to  the  board  or  to  the  committee,  as  the  case  may  be,  a  full 
written  report  of  his  proceedings,  and  of  the  condition  of 
the  several  schools  during  the  year  preceding,  with  plans 
and  suggestions  for  their  improvement."2 

"At  the  annual  town  meeting,  the  superintendent  shall 
make  a  written  report  of  the  condition  of  the  schools  for 
the  past  year,  with  a  statement  of  the  condition  of  school 
buildings,  the  proficiency  made  by  the  pupils,  and  the  suc- 
cess attending  the  modes  of  instruction  and  government 
thereof."8 

Rules  and  Regulations 

Authority  to  formulate  rules  and  regulations  is,  with 
one  or  two  exceptions,  vested  in  the  board  of  education, 
usually  with  the  proviso  that  they  shall  not  be  inconsistent 
with  those  established  by  the  state  authority.4  A  few  of 

"Mass.,  1916.     p.  32.     Sec.  8.  p.  34.     Sec.  15. 
Wisconsin,   1915,      p.   288,   Sec.    464. 
'Connecticut.  1916,  p.  41,  Sec.  125. 
'Maine   1917,   p.   31,   Sec.   59. 
'Oregon,  1919,  p.  51,  Sec.  133. 


7O      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

the  western  states  have  definitely  placed  the  power  of 
initiative  in  the  office  of  the  principal  or  superintendent 
for  making  "such  rules  and  regulations  as  he  may  deem 
proper  in  regard  to  the  studies,  conduct  and  government 
of  the  pupils  under  his  charge."" 

The  superintendent's  responsibility  for  enforcing  the 
rules  and  regulations  is  specially  expressed  in  the  laws 
of  a  number  of  the  states  (See  Chart  A). 

Supervision 

The  Mississippi  law  requires  the  school  trustees  "To 
visit  every  school  in  their  district  at  least  once  in  each 
month,  and  examine  carefully  into  its  management,  con- 
dition and  wants."8  Wyoming  is  less  exacting  in  that  the 
monthly  visitation  shall  be  done  by  a  committee  appointed 
by  the  board  from  their  own  number.7  The  specific  obli- 
gations of  the  board  when  they  visited,  the  schools  and 
the  intimation  that  they  might  need  assistance  in  the  per- 
formance of  such  duties  is  indicated  in  the  following : — 

"Said  board  shall  also,  separately  or  collectively,  to- 
gether with  such  persons  as  they  may  appoint  or  in- 
vite, visit  the  schools  in  the  district  at  least  twice  a 
year,  and  observe  the  discipline,  mode  of  teaching, 
progress  of  pupils,  and  see  that  the  teachers  keep  a 
correct  register  of  the  pupils.  . .  .the  branches  taught, 
and  such  other  matters  as  may  be  required  by  law  or 
by  the  instructions  of  the  state  superintendent."* 
Montana  limits  the  supervisory  duty  of  board  members 
to  one  visit,  each  term,  to  every  school.9    The  requirement 
coordinates  nicely  with  the  provision  that  the  superin- 
tendent shall  have  supervision  of  the  schools  of  the  dis- 
trict under  the  supervision  of  the  board  of  trustees."10 

'Kansas,  1917,  p.  144,  Sec.  411.     See  also  Iowa,  1919,  p.  85  Sec.  2732, 

Wyominr,  1919,  p.   70,   Sec.  228. 
'Mississippi,    1918,   p.    39,    Sec.   4525-g. 
^Wyoming,  1919,  p.  41,  Sec.  123. 
•Arkansas,   1914,  p.   147,   Sec.   7685. 
•Montana,  1917,  p.  56,   Sec.   508-18. 
"Montana,  1909,  p.  89,  Sec.  150, 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  Jl 

Whereas  the  laws  of  Montana  and  Arkansas  indicate 
that  the  supervisory  powers  and  duties  of  the  superin- 
tendent developed  as  a  means  of  relieving  the  members 
of  the  board;  the  law  of  Pennsylvania  indicates  another 
process  of  development, — "The  duties  of  district  super- 
intendents shall  be  the  same  as  those  now  required  of 
county  superintendents."1  The  gist  of  his  supervisory 
duties  is :  "To  visit  personally  as  often  as  practicable, 
the  several  schools. . .  .under  his  supervision,  to  note  the 
courses  and  methods  of  instruction  and  branches  taught, 
to  give  such  directions  in  the  art  and  methods  of  teaching 
in  each  school  as  he  deems  expedient  and  necessary."1 
In  Delaware  one  of  the  requirements,  in  order  that  a  town 
or  city  may  be  independent  of  the  county  superintendent,  is 
that  the  superintendent  of  school  shall  have  at  least  one- 
half  of  his  entire  time  free  for  supervision.' 

The  changing  social  conditions  brought  about  by  the 
Great  War  placed  in  the  statutes  of  Nebraska  a  new  and 
far-reaching  power  of  the  city  superintendent.4 

"The  City  Superintendent  of  the  city  where  any 
private,  denominational  or  parochial  school  is  located, 
shall  inspect  such  school  and  report  to  the  proper  of- 
ficers any  evidence  of  the  use  of  any  text-books  or  of 
any  activities,  instruction  or  propaganda  therein  sub- 
versive of  American  institutions  and  republican  form  of 
government  or  good  citizenship  or  of  failure  to  observe 
any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act." 

While  the  above  provision  was  the  result  of  the  tense 
feeling  of  a  war  period,  it  is  indicative  of  the  light  in 
which  city  superintendents  may  be  held  by  legislatures 
when  there  is  urgent  or  strong  need  for  supervision  of 
educational  procedure. 

»Penn.,  1919,  p,  73.  Sec.  1143. 

»Penn.,  1919,  p.  68,  Sec.  1123. 

'Delaware,  1919  p.  160.  Sec.  122-5. 

'Nebraska,  Session  Laws,  37th  Legislature,  p.  7,  Sec.  6. 


72       LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

Supplies  and  Textbooks 

The  law  governing  the  selection  of  text-books  is  closely 
parallel  to  the  laws  governing  the  preparation  of  courses 
of  study  (See  Chart  A).  There  is  a  tendency  to  give 
teachers  and  superintendent  a  good  deal  of  responsibility 
in  the  selection  of  instrumental  supplies ;  and  in  only  two 
states  does  the  superintendent  have  other  than  advisory 
powers  in  the  selection  of  supplies  for  non-instructional 
purposes.  Those  states  that  have  state  adoption  usually 
make  provision  for  local  authorities  to  select  from  the 
state  lists.8  The  superintendent  has  various  relationships 
to  the  board  in  the  selection  of  textbooks.  In  Iowa  "The 
board  of  education  may,  to  the  end  that  they  may  be  fully 
advised,  consult  with  the  city  superintendent  or  other  com- 
petent person,  with  reference  to  the  selections  of  text- 
books."6 The  Massachusetss  law  requires  that  the  super- 
intendent shall  recommend  text-books  to  the  school  com- 
mittee.7 The  Vermont  law  gives  the  superintendent  a 
veto  power  in  that  "The  board  of  school  directors  shall, 
subject  to  the  approval  of  the  superintendent,  select  the 
textbooks,  appliances  and  supplies  to  be  used  in  the  public 
schools  of  the  town."8  The  Washington  law  provides  for 
a  text-book  commission  in  "each  school  district  of  the 
first  division,"  which  consists  of  city  superintendent,  ex- 
officio  chairman,  two  board  members  designated  by  the 
board,  and  two  lawfully  qualified  teachers  employed  in  the 
district  and  designated  by  the  board.  It  is  the  duty  of  the 
board  of  directors  to  require  the  introduction  and  use  of 
all  textbooks  lawfully  adopted  by  the  commission.'  The 
Pennsylvania  law  makes  a  different  provision  for  teacher 

•Wyoming,  1919,  p.  12,  Sec.  25.     Colo.,  1915,  p.  151,  Sec.  1750.     Oregon, 

1919,  p.  98,  Sec.   302-4. 
•Iowa.  1919,  p.  79,  Sec.  2828. 
TMass.,   1914,   p.   33,   Sec.    2. 
•Vt.,   1915,   p.   29,   Sec.    139. 
•Washington,  1917.  p.  106,  Sec.  381. 


STATUS  OP  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  73 

initiative  in  their  selection  bf  textbooks  and  safeguards 
the  superintendent's  authority.  The  law  provides  that  the 
"superintendent.  ..  .shall  report  in  which  subjects  new 
textbooks  are  needed,  and  after  consultation  with  the 
teachers  under  his  supervision,  what  textbooks  should 
be  adopted  or  changed,  and  unless  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of 
the  board  an  adoption  or  change  of  textbooks  shall  not 
be  made  without  his  recommendation." ' 

TEACHER* — EXAMINATION  AND  CERTIFICATION 

Of  all  the  functions  of  city  school  administration,  that 
of  examining  and  certificating  teachers  is  farthest  re- 
moved from  the  absolute  control  of  the  board  of  educa- 
tion. Chart  A  shows  to  what  extent  the  state  dominates 
and  also  the  responsibility  fixed  by  law  in  many  of  the 
states  on  the  city  superintendent.  Only  in  the  larger 
cities  does  the  board  have  any  degree  of  independence 
from  the  state  authority.  The  Colorado  law  specifies  that 
"School  boards,  in  districts  of  first  class,  (1,000  or  more 
pupils)  have  entire  control  of  the  examination  and  licens- 
ing of  applicants  to  teach  in  their  districts."11  The  tra- 
ditional influence  of  a  law  that  once  empowered  local 
boards  with  the  sole  authority  for  the  exercise  of  this 
function  appears  in  the  Illinois  law  which  authorizes 
boards  of  education  in  cities  of  1,000  to  100,000  popula- 
tion "To  examine  teachers  by  examinations,  supplemen- 
tal to  any  other  examinations." ' 

A  procedure  common  to  several  of  the  state  laws  is 
given  in  the  South  Dakota  code.  . .  ."The  board  shall  also 
appoint  two  competent  persons  who,  with  the  superin- 
tendent as  chairman,  shall  be  styled  the  committee  of  the 
board  of  education."  *  In  some  cases  the  examining 

"Pennsylvania,  1919.  p.  56,  Sec.  703. 

"Colorado,    1917,   p.    123. 

'Illinois,  1916,  p.  40,  Sec.  127-3. 

•South  Dakota,  1018.  p.  93,  Sec.  204;  Oklahoma.  1919.  p.  28  Sac.   133. 


74 

committee  issues  the  certificate;1  but  usually  the  exam- 
ining committee  recommends  to  the  board  of  education, 
which  body  issues  the  certificate.  In  certain  of  the  states 
the  law  specifies  that  the  members  appointed  by  the  board 
shall  be  residents  of  the  city  "having  practical  experience 
as  teachers;*  or  teachers  serving  full  time  in  the  city 
schools.5  In  Oregon  city  districts  of  the  first  class  the 
law  requires  that  the  board  of  examiners  created  by  the 
board  of  education  shall  have  the  city  superintendent  as 
a  member;  and  the  county  superintendent  as  ex-officio 
chairman.* 

The  transfer  of  the  exercise  of  this  function  from  the 
office  of  the  county  superintendent  to  the  city  superin- 
tendent is  seen  in  the  Arkansas  law, — "The  superintendent 
of  the  city  schools  in  any  such  city,  duly  elected  as  such 
by  the  school  board,  shall  have  the  authority  and  perform 
the  duty  of  a  county  examiner  as  provided  by  law." 
In  Texas  the  city  board  of  examiners  consists  of  the 
superintendent  and  two  teachers  appointed  by  him.8 .  A 
few  states  make  the  city  superintendent  practically  inde- 
pendent of  the  board  in  the  exercise  of  this  function.  In 
Wisconsin  cities  of  the  third  and  fourth  class  "It  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  city  superintendent  of  schools. . .  .to 
examine  and  license  teachers.9  In  Pennsylvania  "The 
....superintendent  shall  conduct  the  examinations  of 
teachers  for  provisional  and  professional  certificates,"10 
and  may  issue  such  certificates  subject  to  the  provisions  of 
the  law.u  Usually,  when  the  local  city  board  of  education 
has  little  or  no  control  in  this  matter,  the  action  of  the 

3South  Dakota,  1918,  p.  93,  Sec.  204. 

'Washington,    1917,   p.   128-130,    Sec.   396-401. 

•Ohio,  1915,  p.   313,   Sec.   7838. 

•Oregon,  1919,  p.  98,  Sec.  302-5. 

TArk.,  1914,  p.  76,  Sec.  7559-u. 

Texas,  1917.  pp.  54-55,  Sec.  103. 

•Wisconsin,   1915,   p.   277,    Sec.   458-O. 

"Pennsylvania,  1917,  p.  T2,  Sec    1148. 

"Pennsylvania.  1917,  p.  75,  Sec.   1302;  p.  76,  Sec.  1300-1307. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  75 

superintendent  is  subject  to  review  by  the  state  executive 
officer." 

Usually  the  certificate  issued  by  the  local  board  authori- 
ties is  valid  only  in  the  district  where  issued;  and  there 
is  a  growing  tendency  to  further  restrict  the  issuance  of 
certificates  by  city  school  authorities.  The  Kansas  law 
indicates  two  types  of  restriction.  Quoting  from  the  law : 
first,  "Cities  of  the  first  and  second  class  must  recognize 
certificates  and  diplomas  issued  by  the  State  Board  of 
Education  and  the  State  Normal  Schools ;"  second,  "After 
September  I,  1916,  such  certificates  (those  issued  by  city 
authorities)  will  be  valid  only  in  Elementary  Schools." ' 

TEACHERS — APPOINTMENT 

While  the  majority  of  the  states  merely  authorize  and 
empower  city  boards  to  employ  teachers,1  there  is  a  con- 
siderable recognition  of  the  need  of  vesting  the  initiative 
of  this  duty  in  the  office  of  the  superintendent.  The  Mass- 
achusetts law  requires  that  "The  superintendent  of  schools 
shall  recommend  teachers  to  the  school  committee." ' 
Table  III  shows  how  many  states  have  vested  the  super- 
intendent with  this  advisory  power.  Louisiana  requires 
that,  "The  board  shall ....  select  such  teachers  from  nom- 
inations made  by  the  parish  superintendent;"  but,  pro- 
vides "That  two-thirds  of  the  full  membership  of  the 
board  may  elect  teachers  without  the  endorsement  of  the 
superintendent."  !  Table  V  enumerates  the  states  which 
have  attempted  by  law  to  vest  the  sole  power  of  initiative 
for  the  selection  of  teachers,  in  the  office  of  the  city  super- 
intendent. In  North  Carolina  the  superintendent  "must 
meet  with  committee  for  election  of  teachers,  and  such 


"See  references  II  above:   also  Ark.,   1914,  p.   76,  Sec.   7559-u. 

"Kansas,  1917,  p.  31,  Sec.   55;  p.  49-50,   Sec.   117, 

^ee  Chart  A. 

'Mass.,   1902-1914,  p.  33,  Sec.   2. 

•Louisiana,   1916,   p.   115,   Sec.    7. 


76      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

election  must  have  his  approval.4  A  new  venture  of  the 
State  is  seen  in  the  provision  of  the  Vermont  law, — "The 
state  board  of  education  shall  appoint  the  teachers  for 
vocational  courses  in  senior  high  schools."  ' 

TEACHERS — TRANSFER    AND    PROMOTION 

On  these  two  functions  the  law  usually  is  silent;  and 
where  the  power  is  not  specifically  mentioned,  it  is  as- 
sumed that  such  power  is  vested  in  the  board  of  educa- 
tion to  be  exercised  or  delegated  as  the  board  sees  fit.  A 
few  of  the  states'  have  specifically  placed  the  power  of 
initiative  in  these  matters  in  the  office  of  superintendent ; 
and  in  Virginia  "The  division  superintendent  in  cities 
shall  have  exclusive  authority  to  assign  to  their  respective 
positions  all  teachers  and  principals  employed  by  the 
school  board  and  to  reassign  them  at  his  discretion ;  pro- 
vided, that  no  change  or  reassignment  shall  affect  the  sal- 
ary of  any  teacher.7 

TEACHERS — SUPERVISION  AND  DISMISSAL 

Those  states  which  vest  the  board  of  education  with 
authority  to  dismiss  teachers  usually  safeguard  the  teach- 
er's rights  by  requiring  that  the  charges  be  reduced  to 
writing  and  that  the  teacher  have  the  right  to  be  heard 
before  the  board,  usually  with  counsel.8  A  further  safe- 
guard is  indicated  in  the  Massachusetts  law  which  pro- 
vides that  a  teacher  cannot  be  dismissed  unless  "the  super- 
intendent shall  have  given  to  the  school  committee  his 
recommendations  as  to  the  proposed  dismissal."  '  Table 
IV  names  the  states  that  have  recognized  the  influence 
that  the  city  superintendent  should  have  in  the  control 
of  the  initial  step  of  dismissing  a  teacher.  The  Oregon 

•North  Carolina,  1917,  p.  58,  Sec.  IX. 

•Vermont,  1915,  p.  41,  Sec.  11. 

•See  Table  IV. 

'Virginia,  1915,  p.  191,  Sec.  92. 

•Iowa,  1919.  p.  42.  Sec.  2782:   Ohio.  1915,  p.  246,  Sec.  7701. 

"Mass.,    1914,   p.    26,   Sec.   2. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES  77 

law  introduces  distinct  features.  Charges  against  a 
teacher  on  the  permanent  list1  shall  be  preferred  by  the 
superintendent  either  upon  his  own  motion  or  upon  the 
complaint  or  criticisms  made  in  writing  and  filed  with 
him:  these  written  complaints  must  be  signed.  In  the 
latter  case  if  the  superintendent  refuses  to  act,  the  com- 
plainant may  take  the  case  directly  to  the  board.  The 
board  must  notify  the  teacher  in  writing  of  the  charges; 
the  teacher  may  require  hearing  to  be  public  or  private, 
and  may  have  counsel  ;  and  may  appeal  from  the  board's 
decision  within  20  days  to  the  Commission.  This  Com- 
mission consists  of  three  members  appointed  by  the  pre- 
siding judge  of  the  circuit  court.2  In  Missouri  the 
board  of  education  has  no  power  to  dismiss  a  teacher; 
but  may  prefer  charges  against  the  teacher  with  the 
county  superintendent  who  may  revoke  any  county  cer- 
tificate or  recommend  the  revoking  of  any  State  certifi- 
cate.3 In  a  few  cases,  the  right  of  local  officials  to  dis- 
miss a  teacher  is  subject  to  appeal  and  final  decision  by  a 
state  authority.1 

THE  SUPERINTENDENT  AND  HIS  ASSOCIATE 

EXECUTIVE 

Four  states  permit  the  board  of  education  to  appoint  a 
second  executive  officer  who  shall  have  charge  of  the 
business  affairs  of  the  schools,  who  is  largely  independ- 
ent of  the  superintendent  and  whose  powers  and  duties 
are  defined  by  law.5  A  few  of  the  states  specify  that  cer- 
tain of  these  duties  may  be  delegated  by  the  board  to  its 
/of  'secretary.  The  laws  of  several  states  au- 


1One  who  has  served  two  full  school  years.     Oregon,   1919,  p.   Ill,   Sec. 

360. 
'Oregon,    1919,    pp.    111-112,    Sec.    359-364.      Data   applies    to   cities   of 

2000  or  more  population. 

'Missouri,   1917,  p.   20,   S€c.    10788  ;   p.    132,   Sec.   10945. 
'West  Virginia,   1919,  p.   27,  Sec.  57. 
5See  page  64. 


78      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

thorize  the  appointment  of  assistant  superintendents ;  and 
usually  leave  the  enumeration  of  their  duties  to  the  board 
or  superintendent  or  both.*  The  Wisconsin  law  gives  the 
board  of  education  power  "To  authorize  the  superin- 
tendent to  appoint  such  assistant  superintendents,  either 
for  general  or  special  service,  as  they  may  deem  neces- 
sary." 7 

SUMMARY 

1.  The  authority  to  fix  responsibility  for  the  exercise 
of  the  various  functions  of  city  school  administration  is 
vested  in  the  state  legislative  body. 

2.  State  legislatures  have  vested  various  phases  of 
responsibility  for  the  exercise  or  control  of  different  func- 
tions of  city  school  administration  in  the  electorate,  the 
municipal  civil  authorities,  the  city  board  of  education, 
the  city  superintendent,  the  county  authorities,  and  the 
central  state  educational  authorities. 

3.  Only  one  state  vests  the  sole  authority  for  the  exer- 
cise of  any  single  school  administrative  function  in  a  city 
civil  authority ;  and  the  majority  of  the  states  have  elim- 
inated the  municipal  civil  authorities  from  any  control 
over  school  affairs  whatsoever. 

4.  Most  of  the  states  have  made  city  school  officials 
free  to  act  according  to  their  own  discretion  within  cer- 
tain statutory  limits ;  and  many  have  devised  means,  other 
than  submitting  a  proposal  to  popular  vote,  of  keeping 
school  officials  close  to  the  public  they  serve. 

5.  Most  of  the  states  have  vested  certain  powers  over 
city  school  administration  in  a  centralized  state  educa- 
tional authority. 

6.  The  laws  indicate  two  sources  of  development  of 
the  office  of  city  superintendent:   (i)   cities  desired  in- 

'Pennsylvania,   1917.   p.    71,    Sec.    1143;    So.    Dakota,    1918,   p.    93,    Sec. 
204.     Court  decision. 

,   1915,  p.   351,   Sec.   925-116-9. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  48  STATES     79 

dependence  of  county  control,  and  so  the  powers  and 
duties  of  the  county  superintendent  as  a  state  official  were 
transferred  to  the  office  of  the  city  superintendent;  (2) 
as  cities  developed  and  the  functions  of  administration 
became  more  highly  specialized,  the  board  of  education 
needed  an  official  or  officials  to  assume  a  part  of  their  re- 
sponsibility. 

7.  The  conflict  of  these  two  fundamental  processes 
of  development  is  the  basic  cause  of  uncertainty  in  legis- 
lation and  of  confusion  in  defining  by  law  the  powers  and 
duties  of  boards  and  of  superintendents. 

8.  Many  of  the  states  have  specified  by  law  the  mini- 
mum qualifications  necessary  for  filling  the  office  of  city 
superintendent. 

9.  The  law  recognizes  the  right  of  the  state  to  specify 
certain  powers  and  duties  of  the  city  superintendent  ;l  and 
denies  the  right  of  the  city  board  of  education  to  inter- 
fere with  the  superintendent's  exercise  of  these  powers 
and  duties. 

i  p.  These  powers  and  duties  are  of  three  general  types  : 

a.  Advisory. 

b.  Initiatory,  i.  e.,  the  board  can  act  only  upon  the 

recommendation  or  initiation  by  the  superin- 
tendent. 

c.  Independent,  i.   e.,  the  superintendent  acts  as 

an  official  of  the  state  ;  and  his  acts  are  not 
subject  to   official    veto    or   approval   by   the      I 
board.  \ 


1919,  p.  40,  Sec.  2778.  "The  board  of  directors  ----  shall  have 
the  power  to  employ  a  superintendent  of  schools.  .  .  .who  shall.  .  .  . 
have  such  powers  and  duties  as  they  may  prescribe,  with  such 
duties  and  powers  as  are  now  or  may  hereafter  be  prescribed  by 
the  laws  of  the  state." 

Idaho,  1917,  p.  89.  The  toard  is  empowered  to  employ  a  superintend- 
ent of  schools,  "•who  shall  be  the  executive  officer  of  the  board, 

with  such  powers  and  duties  as  are  now  or  may  hereafter  be  prescribed 

by  the  laws  of  the  state         ."     Italics  by  the  author. 


CHAPTER   IV 

PROVISION  MADE  FOR  THE  ADMINISTRATION 
OF  CITY  SCHOOLS  BY  GENERAL  LEGIS- 
LATION  FOR  CITIES   OF   THE 
FIRST  CLASS  AND  BY  SPE- 
CIAL  CITY   CHARTERS 

An  examination  of  the  different  state  codes  shows 
two  distinct  means  of  providing  for  the  administration  of 
city  schools.  One  method  is  to  classify  all  cities  of  the 
state,  usually  according  to  population,  and  to  make  the 
same  law  applicable  to  all  cities  of  the  same  group.  The 
other  method  is  to  pass  a  general  law  allowing  cities  to 
adopt  a  home  rule  plan  within  certain  limitations.  This 
second  plan  often  vests  considerable  control  over  school 
affairs  in  the  municipal  civil  authorities. 

This  part  of  the  investigation  aims  at  two  things:  (a) 
to  discover  what  specific  provisions  have  been  made  by 
legislatures  to  meet  the  special  administrative  needs  of 
individual  city  school  systems;  and  (b)  to  learn  whether 
or  not  city  municipal  authorities  when  given  legislative 
powers  over  schools  are  contributing  to  the  development 
of  better  city  school  administration. 

The  study  includes  35  typical  cities.1     The  school  sys- 

'Kor  this  part  cf  the  study,  the  writer  had  access  to  the  Columbia  Uni- 
versity Law  Library,  and  the  New  York  Municipal  Reference 
Library,  located  at  the  Forty-Second  Strfet  Library  and  the  City 
Hall.  Three  criteria  guided  in  the  selection  of  cities  to  be  studied : 
(a)  the  recency  of  legislation  or  adoption  of  a  charter,  (b)  the 
charter,  if  giving  any  powers  over  schools  to  the  city  council  or 
commission,  must  be  accompanied  by  the  city  code  of  ordinances ; 
(c)  the  selection  should  represent  different  and  typical  sections 
cf  the  country.  The  selection  was  limited  to  those  volumes  on  file 
'n  the  libraries  named.  A  latar  check  by  correspondence  showed 
that  some  of  the  charter  provisions  described  in  this  chapter  are 

80 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  8l 

terns  of  six  of  these  operate  under  general  laws  applicable 
to  cities  of  the  first  class:  fifteen  operate  their  schools 
under  special  laws  or  charters ;  and  twelve  have  special 
charters  that  in  no  way  affect  their  school  systems  which 
operate  under  the  general  state  law.'  The  data  for  cities 
of  the  first  class,  Group  I,  and  cities  with  special  charters 
Group  2,  are  combined  in  Chart  B  (see  Appendix  I). 
For  cities  of  Group  I  only  such  data  are  tabulated  as  are 
specifically  mentioned  in  the  law  for  cities  of  the  first 
class.  For  Group  2,  only  such  data  as  are  specifically 
mentioned  in  the  charter  or  in  the  city  code  of  ordinances 
are  included.  This  plan  of  study  accounts  for  the  many 
omissions  in  Chart  B  and  from  the  tables  of  this  chapter ; 
but  it  was  followed  in  order  to  show  as  clearly  as  pos- 
sible what  provisions  are  made  for  city  school  adminis- 
tration through  legislation  of  these  special  types  that  is 
not  made  through  the  general  legislation  noted  in  the 
preceding  chapter.  For  the  omissions,  one  needs  but  to 
refer  to  the  general  law,  as  is  indicated  in  the  following: 
"Said  board  is  hereby  vested  with  all  the  powers  and 
charged  with  all  the  duties  provided  by  the  Charter,  and 
also  by  the  general  laws  of  the  state  for  city  boards  of 
education." ' 

THE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION 

Table  XIII  shows  various  plans  that  have  been  evolved 
for  selecting  a  city  board  of  education.     Only  two  cities 

no  lonrer  extant.  Notably  air.cng  thwe  are  the  provisions  for 
Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  and  Greensboro,  N.  C.  The  discussion  of  those 
charters  as  they  were  adopted  In  1916  and  1912,  respectively,  t<- 
retained  to  illustrate  how  such  variations  from  generally  ac- 
cepted practice  as  they  represented  fo  soon  disappears.  Today 
(1920)  the  Buffalo  schools  are  administered  under  the  law  appli- 
cable to  New  York  cities  of  the  first  class,  and  the  Greensboro 
schools  are  administered  by  a  superintendent  and  board  of  educa- 
tion provided  for  In  a  new  charter. 

'The  two  remaining  charters  including  Cincinnati,  1914,  and  Minnea- 
polis 1913,  were  proposed  but  not  adopted. 

»Los  Anpeles,  California.  Charter,  1913,  p.  63,  Sec.  76,  par.  5;  Rut- 
land, Vt.,  Charter,  1915  p.  70  Sec.  190;  New  Haven,  Conn.,  Charter 
1914.  p.  68,  Be«.  109. 


82      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
TABLE    XIII.      BOARD   OF    EDUCATION — METHOD    OF    SELECTION 

Showing  how  members  of  the  board  of  education  secure  the 
office  in  twenty-one  cities  of  the  United  'States. 

Method  of  Selection  Number  of  Cities 

Group  I  (6  cities  of  the  first  class) 

Appointed  by   a   court    i 

Appointed  by.  mayor  and  confirmed  by  the  council I 

Elected  by  popular  vcte    4 

Group  II  (15  Special  Charter  Cities) 

Appointed    by    the    mayor     2    . 

*Appointed  by  mayor  and  approved  by  the  council 4 

Appointed  by  city  commission  or  council 2 

*Elected  by  popular  vote '. 6 

City  Com.  serves  as  beard  of  education i 

of  the  twenty-one  allow  for  ward  representation.1  Ten  or 
practically  half  provide  for  election  of  board  members  by 
popular  vote.  Philadelphia1  is  putting  into  practice  a 
theory  that  evidently  was  designed  to  place  a  judicial 
rather  than  political  type  of  mind  in  control  of  the 
schools ;  and  Greensboro*  tried  a  unique  experiment  in 
commission  government,  that  eliminated  the  board  of  edu- 
cation entirely  and  made  the  superintendent  a  strong 
executive  subject  only  to  the  commission. 

Table  XIV  shows  the  provision  that  has  been  made  for 
the  removal  of  board  members  in  a  number  of  the  cities 
studied.  It  seems  that,  if  any  one  principle  holds,  it  is 
that  the  appointing  power  should  also  have  the  power  of 
removal.  Where  members  secure  office  by  popular  vote, 
removal  by  recall  and  by  the  courts  seem  to  be  equally  in 
favor. 


•In  each  case,  one  city  only  has  ward  representation. 
1Proridenc«,  R.  I.,  Charter  and  Special  Laws,  1916. 
^Pennsylvania,  The  School  Law.  1919,  p.  18,  Sec.  202. 
•Greensboro.  X.  C..  Charter,  1912. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  83 

TABLE    XIV.      BOARD    OP    EDUCATION — REMOVAL 

Showing   authority   empowered    to    remove   members    of    the 
board  of  education. 
Authority  empmvered  to  remove 
members  of  Board  of  Education  No.  of  Cities 

Group  I 
The  courts    3 

Group  II 

The   Mayor   2 

The  council  - 2 

The  mayor    subject  to  appeal  to  courts I 

The  recall popular  vote • 3 

In  the  remaining  9  cities  (3  of  Group  I  and  6  of  Group  II)  tbr 
writer  did  not  find  any  specific  provision  in  law  or  charter  for 
removal  of  board  members :  in  these  cases  the  general  law  ap- 
plicable to  smaller  cities  or  to  the  school  system  in  general 
would  apply  (this  general  law  was  consulted  and  bears  out 
these  facts). 

Table  XV  shows  the  size  of  boards  of  education.  Five 
(5)  is  the  mode  for  the  21  cities ;  and  the  exact  median  is 
less  than  seven  (7).  In  a  few  cases  the  board  has  ex 
officio  membership.  In  Berkeley  one  of  the  five  members 
is  a  "Councilman  appointed  to  be  Commissioner  of 
Finance  and  Revenue."1  In  Providence,  "The  Mayor, 
the  president  of  the  common  council,  and  the  chairman 
of  the  committee  on  education  of  the  city  council"  are  ex- 

TABLE     XV.      BOARD    OF    EDUCATION — NUMBER    OF     MEMBERS 

No.  of  members 

constituting  board.  ATo.  cities 

4    i 

5    .- * 

7    4 

9   2 

ii  : 2 

12     I 

15  i 

20    I 

(No  Board  of  Education)   I 


'Berkeley,  California,  Charter,  1909,  p.  15,  Sec.  8. 


84      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
TABLE    XVI.      BOARD    01?    EDUCATION LENGTH    OF    TERM 

Term  in  years  No   cities 

2    5 

3 2 

4   6 

5    3 

6   5 

officio  members  of  the  committee  of  20  ward  representa- 
tives.* In  Birmingham,  the  president  of  the  City  Com- 
mission is  also  president  of  the  board  of  education.3 

Table  XVI  gives  the  length  of  term  of  board  members 
in  the  20  cities  studied.  Here,  the  mode  and  the  median 
is  four  years,  with  the  range  from  two  to  six  years. 

THE    SUPERINTENDENT 

All  of  these  21  cities  have  legislative  provision  for  a 
superintendent  of  schools.  In  this  small  group,  there  are 
six  distinct  means  of  selecting  the  chief  school  officia' 
(See  Table  XVII),  although  16  of  the  21  vest  the  board 

TABLE  XVII.      THE  SUPERINTENDENT — HOW  SELECTED 

Group     I.     By  Board  of  Education 5 

By  Board  of  Education  subject  to  veto  or  ap- 
proval on  appeal  to  State  Commissioner i 

Group  II.     By    Board    of    Education 1 1 

By    City    Commissioner i 

By  City  Council  i 

By  Mayor   i 

By  Popular  Vote   i 

TABLE  xvm.    THE  SUPERINTENDENT — HOW   REMOVED 

Group  of  Authority  vested  with 

cities  power  to  remove  Supt.  No.  of  cities 

I  Board   of   Education 5 

(No   provision   for  removal i 

II  Board  of   Education    6 

Mayor     2 

City    Commission    I 

*Not  specified  in  code  or  charter 6 

Providence,    Rhode    Island,    Charter    and    Special    Laws,    1916,    p.    184. 

Sec.  5. 

•Birminirham,  Alabama,  Code,  1917,  p.  54,  Sec.  45. 
•In  these  six  cases  the  provisions  of  the  general  law  operate:  only  the 

city    code  and   special   charters   were   consulted. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  85 

TABLE    XIX.      THE     SUPERINTENDENT — TERM    OF    OFFICE 
iroup  of 
cities  Terms  in  Years  No.  cities 

1  i  to  4  i 

4'     i 

4     4 

II  i     I 

1,  i-52    i 

2,     -2 

4    ^ 

Not   specified3    9 

of  education  with  responsibility  for  his  appointment. 
Table  XVIII  shows  the  provision  that  has  been  made  for 
the  removal  of  the  superintendent  from  office. 

Only  12  of  the  21  cities  specify  the  length  of  term  for 
which  the  superintendent  may  or  shall  be  elected;  six 
make  the  term  definitely  four  years,  while  only  one  re- 
quires an  annual  appointment. 

POWERS  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  SUPERINTENDENT 

The  powers  and  duties  of  the  superintendent  fall  into 
three  main  groups:  (a)  Those  in  which  he  has  advisory 
power  only;  (b)  those  in  which  the  power  of  initiative 
is  vested  solely  in  the  office  of  the  superintendent;  (c) 
those  over  which  the  board  of  education  either  has  no 
control  or  control  of  merely  an  advisory  nature.  A  fourth 
group,  purely  executive  functions,  of  course,  is  as- 
sumed ;  and  the  exercise  of  these  executive  functions  are 
sometimes  safeguarded  by  statutory  provision.  These 
four  groups  will  be  noted  in  order,  briefly. 

( i )  In  a  number  of  the  cities  the  superintendent's  ad- 
visory function  is  specified  and  safeguarded  in  the  law. 
In  New  Orleans,  "He  shall  be  entitled  to  participate  in 
the  deliberations  and  debates  of  said  board,  but  shall 


'Probationary  term  of  cue  year ;  when  reappointed  term  is  4  years. 
'Probationary  term  of  one  year ;  when  reappointed  term  may  be  5  years. 
'The  provisions  of  the  general  law  for  cities  govern  these  cases. 


86      LEGAL  STATUS  Of  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
TABLE  XX.      ADVISORY  POWERS  OK  THE  SUPERINTENDENT 

Enumerating  certain  functions  concerning  which  the  general 
laws  or  the  city  codes  and  charters  vest  the  city  superintendent 
with  advisory  powers  and  responsibility. 

FUNCTIONS  CITIES 

Buildings  and  Grounds 
Preparation  of  plans  for 

new    buildings Philadelphia,   Berkeley,   Alhambra 

Repairs  Philadelphia,       Baltimore,        Los 

Angeles,   San   Francisco. 

Curricula   New     Orleans,     Baltimore.     San 

Francisco,  Houston. 
Selection  of : — 

Textbooks   New     Orleans,     Baltimore,     San 

Francisco. 

Instructional  Supplies San  Francisco. 

Instruction    New  Orleans,  Houston. 

'This  tattle  includes  only  these  instances  in  the  laws  relating  to  cities 
of  the  first  class  or  in  city  codes  and  charters  where  the  superin- 
tendent is  specifically  required  to  advise  the  board  on  some  par- 
ticular function. 

.have  no  vote."  l  In  Los  Angeles  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
superintendent  to  "attend  all  sessions  of  the  board,  and 
inform  it  at  each  session  of  the  condition  of  the  public 
schools,  shool  houses,  school  fund,  and  other  matters 
necessary  for  the  advancement  of  education  in  the  city."  ! 
In  addition  to  the  general  advisory  duties  of  the  super- 
intendent mentioned  above,  the  law  often  mentions  certain 
specific  functions  concerning  which  he  must  advise  the 
board,  and  on  which  the  board  shall  not  take  action  until 
they  have  considered  his  advice.  These  provisions  are 
indicated  roughly  in  Table  XX. 

INITIATORY  POWERS  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  SUPERINTENDENT 

Figure  3  in  Chart  B  indicates  the  large  number  of 
functions  which  various  cities  have  made  the  superin- 
tendent's office  responsible  for  initiating.  The  intent  of 


'La.,  1919,  p.  150,  Sec.  66;  Ind.,  1917,  p.  166,  Sec.  296;  Tenn.,  1919, 

p.  73.  Sec.  1142  ;  111.,  1917,  p.  50,  Sec.  130. 
*Los  Angeles,  Calif.,  Charter,  1913,  p.  64,  Sec.  78. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  87 

the  law  seems  'to  be  clear  that  in  these  cases  the  board  of 
education  shall  take  no  action  until  the  superintendent 
has  placed  the  matter  officially  before  the  board.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  law  makes  it  imperative  that  the  superin- 
tendent shall  take  action.  Occasionally,  the  principle  is 
not  written  into  the  law  whole-heartedly.  The  Illinois  law 
for  cities  of  100,000  population  is  indicative  of  the  com- 
promise that  is  probably  struck  when  this  principle  is  put 
into  actual  practice  for  the  first  time,.  . .  ."Appointments, 
promotions  and  transfers  of  teachers,  principals,  assistant 
and  district  superintendents,  and  all  other  employees  in 
the  teaching  force,  shall  be  made,  sites  shall  be  selected, 
school  houses  located  thereon  and  plans  for  the  same  ap- 
proved, and  text-books  and  educational  apparatus  and 
equipment  shall  be  adopted  and  purchased  by  the  board  of 
education  only  upon  the.  recommendation  of  the  superin- 
tendent of  schools,  unless  it  be  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  all 
the  members  of  the  board." '  But  for  the  most  part,  the 
superintendent's  obligation  is  more  securely  fixed.  In 
Indianapolis  his  "appointments,  promotions  and  trans- 
fers of  teachers"  stand  unless  vetoed  by  a  four-fifths  vote 
of  the  board ;  and  then  the  board  can  take  no  further  ac- 
tion until  the  superintendent  makes  a  new  recommenda- 
tion.2 In  Greensboro  the  principle  held  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  all  employees  of  the  schools.1  In  New  Haven, 
the  initiatory  powers  and  duties  of  the  superintendent  are 
more  firmly  fixed  in  that  he  shall  take  such  action  as  he 
sees  fit  in  changing  courses  of  study,  appointing,  trans- 
ferring and  dismissing  members  of  the  instructional  staff, 
and  shall  report  the  same  to  the  board  of  education  at  its 
next  meeting.  Obviously,  this  procedure  places  more 

Illinois,  1917,  p.  50,  Sec.  130.   (Italics  by  the  author.) 

'Indiana.  1917,  p.  166,  Sec.   296.     See  also  :  Missouri,  Revised  Statutes. 

1909,  p.  3435,  Sec.   11035;  Alhambra,  Calif.,  Charter,   1915,  p.  49, 

Sec.  95. 
'Greensboro,  N.  C.,  Charter.  1912,  p.  19,  Sec.  20. 


88      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


TABLE    XXI.      INITIATORY    POWERS    OF    THE    SUPERINTENDENT 

Functions  for  whose  exercise,  the  power  of  official  initiative  ia 
vested  solely  in  the  office  of  the  superintendent ;  the  board's  action 

being  confined  to  consideration  of  the  superintendent's  recom- 
mendations. (See  figure  3,  Chart  B,  for  the  particular  cities 
concerned.) 

Functions  Group  I                 Group  II 

6  cities  15  cities 

Appointment  of : 

Asst.   Supt  5                              3 

Principals  3                               3 

Teachers  4                             f 

Attendance  Officers  i 

Other  Employees  I 
Transfer  of: 

Principals  2                               I 

Teachers  3                               I 

Attendance    Officers  i 
Promotion  of : 

Instructional  Staff  3 

Attendance  Officers  i 
Dismissal 

Asst.   Superintendents  4 

Principals  3                               * 

Teachers  4                               5 

Attendance  Officers  I 
Buildings  and  Grounds 

Preparation    of    building    plans  i 

Location    of    school    sites  i 

Curricula  4                               3 
Selection  of : 

Textbooks  4                               I 

Instructional   supplies  2 

Supervision  of  Schools  4                               5 
Teachers 

Examination  4                               J 

responsibility  for  clear  thinking  and  right  action  on  the 
part  of  the  superintendent,  than  if  he  were  obliged  to  se- 
cure the  approval  of  the  board  before  taking  any  step.' 
Table  XXI  enumerates  the  functions  and  gives  the  num- 
ber of  the  21  cities  studied,  which  have  definitely  vested 
the  power  of  official  initiative  for  the  exercise  of  said 

•New  Havan.  Charter  Ordinances,  1914,  p.  54,  Sec.  107. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  89 

function  in  the  office  of  the  city  superintendent.  The  par- 
ticular cities  concerned  are  indicated  by  figure  3  on 
Chart  B. 

RESPONSIBILITY   VESTED   SOLELY   IN   THE  OFFICE  OF 
SUPERINTENDENT 

In  different  cities,  certain  functions  of  school  adminis- 
tration have  been  vested  entirely  or  almost  so  in  the  office 
of  the  superintendent ;  in  these  cases  the  board  of  educa- 
tion has  little  or  no  control.  The  superintendent  of  San 
Francisco  appoints  and  may  dismiss  his  deputy  super- 
intendent.1 In  St.  Louis  the  superintendent  has  power 
to  appoint  and  remove  clerks  within  the  limits  set  by  the 
board  as  to  number  and  salary.3  In  San  Francisco  the 
superintendent  and  his  deputies  constitute  the  City  Board 
of  Examiners  and  have  full  power  to  "prescribe  a  stand- 
ard of  efficiency"  for  each  type  of  certificate  to  be  granted.* 
In  Chicago,  the  superintendent  or  a  person  "authorized 
by  him  in  writing"  is  the  only  authority  vested  with 
power  to  issue  employment  certificates;4  and  the  super- 
intendent decides  whether  a  pupil  from  private  or  paro- 
chial school  "has  completed  sufficient  work  to  entitle  him 
to  an  eighth  grade  diploma."5  The  superintendent  of 
Greensboro  had  "power  to  discharge  any  teacher  or  other 
employee  connected  with  the  schools,  for  any  cause  satis- 
factory to  himself,.  ..  .and  establish  rules  and  regula- 
tions for  the  government  of  the  schools,  and  from  his 
authority,  with  respect  to  these  matters,  there  shall  be 
no  appeal."  But  in  case  of  discharge,  he  must  report 
such  fact  to  the  board  of  commissioners;  and  at  the  re- 
quest of  any  commissioner  must  file  "in  writing,  a  full 
report  of  his  action,  and  of  all  reasons  in  influencing  him 

'San  Francisco,  Charter,  1911,  p.  106,  Sec.  2-4 ;  p.  175   -Sec    21 
'Missouri,  R.  S.,   1909,  p.  3436,   Sec.   11035. 
•San  Francisco,  Charter,  1911,  p.  107,  Sec.  6. 
«Illtnois,  1917,  p.  117,  Se«.  4. 
•Illinois,  1017,  p.  4,  Sec.  1-a. 


9O      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


to  discharge  such  employee.'"  In  New  Haven  the  super- 
intendent's "monthly  reports  shall  be  entered  in  a  suit- 
able book  provided  for  the  purpose,  and  shall  be  kept  as 
a  part  of  the  records  of  the  department."7  The  above 
illustrations  are  typical  of  those  powers  and  duties  of  the 
superintendent  indicated  by  figure  I  in  Chart  B  and  set 
forth  in  Table  XXII. 

TABLE  XXII.      POWKRS   AND  DUTIES  OF  THE   SUPERINTENDENT 

Enumerating  those  functions  in  the  exercise  of  which  the  super- 
intendent's action  or  decision  is  not  subject  to  any  action  what- 
soever by  the  board. 

Fnr<-tions  Group  I  Group  II 

Appointment 

Clerks   (Inst.  Dept.)      Tndiananolis_    Louisville. 


Transfer 

Teachers  and  princi- 
pals 

Dismissal 

Asst.  Superintendent 
Clerks   (Inst.  Dept.) 

Teachers  and  princi- 
pals 

Attendance  Officer 
Other  Employees 

Selection  of 
Textbooks    and    In- 
structional         S  u  p- 
plies 

Supervision  of  Schools 

Teachers,        Examina- 
tion of 

Rules  and  Regulations, 
Making  of 

Reports  to 
State  Officials 

Municipal  Officials 


Tndiananolis. 
St.  Louis 


Indianapolis, 
St.  Louis 


Louisville, 


Berkeley 
New  Haven 

San   Francisco 


Greensboro 
San    Francisco 
Greensboro 


Indianapolis 

San    Francisco 

San    Francisco 

Greensboro 
New  Orleans,  Philadelphia. 

Rutland 


•Greensboro,  N.  C.,  Charter  1912,  p.  20,  Sec.  30. 

TNew  Haven,  Charter  and  Ordinances,  1914,  p.  54,  Sec.  107. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  9! 

THE   SUPERINTENDENT   AS  AN    EXECUTIVE   OFFICER 

The  previous  discussion  of  the  powers  and  duties  of 
the  superintendent  indicate  the  executive  nature  of  his 
position.  In  a  number  of  the  cities  he  is  considered  one 
of  the  board's  executive  officers;1  in  a  few  cities  he  is 
specifically  named  as  the  executive  officer  of  the  board.1 
In  the  .latter  group  it  is  usually  specified  that  all  in- 
structions or  orders  of  the  board  of  education  to  princi- 
pals, teachers  or  other  employees  shall  be  given  through 
the  superintendent.1 

OTHER  EXECUTIVE  OFFICERS 

Of  the  21  cities  studied  seven  make  provision  for  one  or 
more  executive  officers  other  than  the  superintendent  and 
assistant  superintendents.  These  are  named  in  Table 
XXIII. 

TABLE   XXIII.      EXECUTIVE   OFFICERS    OTHER   THAN    SUPERINTENDENTS 
AND   ASSISTANT    SUPERINTENDENTS 

City  Title  of  Official 

Chicago    Business  Manager,  Attorney 

Indianapolis    Business  Director,  Supt     of     Buildings 

and  Grounds,  Librarian 

Louisville    Business  Director 

Philadelphia    Supt.  of  Buildings,*  Supt.  of  Supplies.x 

St.  Louis   Com.  of  School  Buildings 

Baltimore    Supervisor  of    School   Buildings.x 

New  Haven    Inspector  of  Buildings.x 

NOTE: — Those  marked  with  the  (x)  may  be  appointed;  the 
others  mentioned  above  must  be.  In  addition,  the  boards  may  or 
must  elect  a  secretary.  In  many  cases  the  law  specified  that  he 
shall  not  be  a  member  of  the  board.3  The  secretary  usually  has 
control  of  the  employees  who  serve  directly  under  him.4 

The  manner  and  time  of  election,  the  term  and  tenure 
of  the  above-named  executive  officers  are  similar,  in 


'Indiana.  1917.  p.  166,  Sec.  295. 
Pennsylvania.  1919,  p.  128,  Sec.  2223. 
Illinois,  1917,  p.  48,  Sec.  129. 
'Berkeley,  Calif.,  Charter,  1909,  p.  58,  Sec.  103. 
Alhambra,  Colo.,  Charter,  1915,  p.  49,  Sec.  93. 

•Pennsylvania,   1919,   p.   25.  Sec.   303 ;   111.,   1917,  p.   48,   Sec.   129 ;   La., 
1919,  p.   147,   Sec.   64 ;    Mo.,   1909,   Revised   Statutes,   p.   3434.   Sec. 
11033 ;  San  Francisco,  Charter,  1911.  p.  101,  Sec.  2. 
•Missouri,  R.  S..  1909,  p.  3438,  Sec.   11041. 


92       LKGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY 'SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

their  respective  fields  to  the  superintendent.  In  Chicago, 
Indianapolis  and  St.  Louis  they  are  elected  for  four  year 
terms;8  in  Louisville  for  a  probationary  term  of  one  year, 
and  for  four  year  terms  when  reappointed.'  In  Phila- 
delphia, the  appointment  must  be  made  each  year.1  They 
may  be  removed  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  board,  usually 
with  the  privilege  of  a  hearing  with  counsel.1 

In  Chicago  and  Louisville,  the  business  manager  or 
director  exercises  approximately  the  some  powers  and 
duties  as  are  vested  in  both  superintendent  of  buildings 
and  superintendent  of  supplies  in  Philadelphia  or  the 
business  manager  and  superintendent  of  buildings  in 
Indianapolis.  Table  XXIV  gives  a  general  analysis  of 
their  powers  and  duties. 

In  Louisville  and  Chicago  the  office  of  business  man- 
ager or  director  combines  the  duties  of  the  two  positions 
enumerated  above.3  The  appointment  and  removal  of 
subordinates  in  Chicago  is  subject  to  the  civil  service 
rules  of  the  city;4  and  in  St.  Louis  and  Louisville,  the 
board  of  education  is  empowered  to  institute  a  compet- 
itive system,  in  which  case  the  executive  officer  is  re- 
quired to  make  his  appointments  from  the  lists  obtained 
by  such  competitive  examinations.*  In  every  case,  such 
executive  officer  is  required  to  "perform  such  other  duties 
as  the  board  may  direct.** 


•111.,  1917.  p.  48,  Sec.  129;  Mo.,  R.  S.,  1909,  p.  3436,  Sec.  11036;  Ind., 

1917,  p.  166.  Sec.  295. 
«Ky.,  1918,  p.  184,  Sec.  404. 
Pennsylvania,  1919.  p.  128,  Sec.  2223. 
^Illinois,  1917,  p.  49,  Sec.  129. 
aKy.,  1918,  p.  185-187,  Sec.  405-409. 

111.,  1917,  p.  49,  Sec.  129;  p.  50,  Sec.  130. 
nil.,  1917.  p.  49,  Sec.  129. 

Ky.,  1918,  p.  186,  Sec.  407. 
•Mo.,  R.  S.,  1909,  p.  3436,  Sec.  11035. 
'•Baltimore,   Charter,   1915,   p.  Ill,  Sec.   100. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  93 

TABLE    XXIV.      POWERS    AND    DUTIES    OF    OTHER    EXECUTIVE    OFFICERS 
Showing  in  a  general  way  the  powers  and  duties  specified  by 
law  for  the  chief  executive  officers  of  the  board,  other  than  super- 
intendent. 

Superintendent  of  Buildings 

1.  To    supervise    buildings    and    grounds — heating,    venti- 

lating plumbing,  and  drainage,  usually  specified. 

2.  To  appoint  and  discharge  engineers,  janitors  and  other 

employees  of  his  department,  subject  to  approval  of 
the  board. 

3.  To   supervise  construction  of   new  buildings. 

4.  To  supervise  making  of  alterations  and  repairs. 

5.  To  instruct  janitors  and  other  workers. 

6.  To  report  monthly,  annually  or  oftener — through  these 

reports  to  advise  the  board. 

Business  Director  or  Manager 

1.  To  execute  contracts  and  obligations  of  the  board. 

2.  To    see    that    contracts    are    fully    and    faithfully   per- 

formed. 

3.  To  advertise  for  bids ;  and  make  all  purchases  author- 

ized by  the  board. 

4.  To   have  custody   of   all   property   not   otherwise  pro- 

vided for. 

5.  To   appoint,   and   remove,   subject   to   approval   of   the 

board,  all  employees  not  otherwise  provided  for. 

6.  To  report  to  the  board  monthly,  annually,  and  oftener 

as  ne  sees  fit  or  as  the  board  directs. 

/.     To  rnp"t  with  the  board  and  superintendent ;  to  have  a 
voice  in  the  deliberations,  but  not  a  vote. 

1  ELATION S    OF    THE    SUPERINTENDENT    TO    OTHER    EXECU- 
TIVE OFFICERS 

It  will  be  noted  from  Table  XXIII  that  only  four  of  the 
twenty-one  cities  considered,  require  the  board  of  educa- 
tion to  elect  an  executive  officer  other  than  superintend- 
ent. There  is  some  recognition  in  the  law  of  the  over- 
lapping of  functions  of  executive  officers ;  and  in  each 
case  a  tendency  to  recognize  the  office  of  the  super- 
intendent. In  Philadelphia,  "All  plans  for  new  school 
construction,  additions  or  repairs  shall  be  approved  by 
the  superintendent  of  buildings  and  shall  be  submitted  to 


94      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

the  superintendent  of  schools  for  criticism  before  sub- 
mission to  the  board  of  public  education  for  adoption."1 
In  Chicago,  "sites  shall  be  selected,  school  houses  located 
thereon  and  plans  for  the  same  approved,  only  upon  the 
recommendation  of  the  superintendent  of  schools,  unless 
it  be  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  members  of  the 
board.'"  In  Providence,  the  secretary  of  the  board  is  re- 
quired by  law  to  keep  all  accounts  "in  such  form  as  may 
be  required  by  the  superintendent." " 

TEACHER  PARTICIPATION  IN  ADMINISTRATIVE  FUNCTIONS 
The  charter  prepared  and  proposed  by  Minneapolis, 
1913,  but  which  failed  of  adoption,  gives  the  only  com- 
prehensive scheme,  found  by  the  writer  in  the  charters 
and  codes  of  ordinances  of  the  34  cities  considered,  for 
participation  by  teachers  in  administrative  functions.  The 
clause  of  the  proposed  charter  follows : 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  School  and  Library  Board 
to  provide  by  rule  for  the  election  of  a  board  of  teach- 
ers of  the  public  schools,  elected  by  secret  ballot  by  the 
teachers  and  principals  thereof.  Said  board  of  teach- 
ers shall  be  called  together  by  the  board  from  time  to 
time,  at  least  once  every  four  months,  to  advise  with 
said  board  and  superintendent  of  schools  upon  matters 
relating  to  the  designation  of  text-books,  adoption  of 
courses  of  study,  methods  of  teaching,  and  other  mat- 
ters pertaining  to  the  conduct  of  the  schools.  Said 
meetings  shall  be  public  and  records  thereof  kept  as 
public  records.  Said  board  of  teachers  shall  have  pow- 
er to  pass  resolutions  and  make  recommendations  upon 
the  above  mentioned  subjects,  but  the  adoption  of  such 
recommendations  shall  be  discretionary  with  the.... 
Board  and  superintendent  of  schools. — Minneapolis, 
Charter,  1913,  />.  no,  Sec.  192. 

Pennsylvania,  1919,   p.   120,   Sec.  2231. 

'Illinois  1917.  p.  50,  Sec.  120.      (Italics  by  the  author.) 

'Providence,  R.  I.     Code  of  Ordinances,  1914,  p.  190,  Sec.  4. 


STATUS  OF  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  95 

GENERAL   LEGISLATION    VS.    SPECIAL   CHARTERS 

The  special  charters  studied  are  of  two  general  types. 
One  vests  more  or  less  control  over  school  affairs 
in  the  city  council  or  other  municipal  civil  authorities; 
the  other  type  considers  the  board  of  education  a  corpora- 
ate  body  independent  of  all  control  from  city  civil  author- 
ity. Thirteen  of  the  fifteen  cities  of  Group  II  belong  to 
the  first  type.  Chart  B  shows  that  in  the  main  this  control 
applies  to  the  budget  and  to  the  various  functions  con- 
cerning buildings  and  grounds. 

The  powers  of  the  city  council  are  set  forth  clearly  in 
the  enabling  act  for  Baltimore  City,  Maryland.  The  law 

reads,  "The  mayor  and  city  council shall  have  full 

power  and  authority  to  establish  in  said  city  a  system  of 

free  public  schools under  such  ordinances,  rules 

and  regulations  as  they  may  deem  fit  and  proper  to  enact 
and  prescribe ;  they  may  delegate  supervisory  powers  and 
control  to  a  board  of  school  commissioners ;  may  pre- 
scribe rules  for  building  school  houses, ;  and  may 

in  general  do  every  act  that  may  be  necessary  or  proper  in 
the  premises."  ]  The  above  section  gives  to  the  city  the 
whole  of  the  state's  power  over  public  schools  in  Balti- 
more, subject,  of  course,  to  the  state's  right  of  repeal* 
The  Buffalo  charter*  gave  the  council  a  general  control 
over  all  the  affairs  coming  under  the  charge  of  the  board 
of  education.  The  council  selected  the  superintendent; 
and  regulated  by  resolution  or  ordinance  the  preparation 
of  lists  of  applicants  for  teaching  positions,  salaries, 
terms  and  conditions  of  appointment.  "The  course  of 
study  and  systems  of  education  shall  be  established.... 

'Md.     Code.     Vol.  2,  1911,  p.  1746,  Sec.  121. 

'Hooper  vs.  New,  85,  Md.,  581 ;  Baltimore  vs.  Weatherby,  52,  Md.,  451. 
lfe  charter  was  superceded  by  the  law  of  1917,  which  placed  the 
functions  enumerated  above  under  the  control  of  the  board  of 
education.  See  New  York  Education  Law,  1920,  p.  249,  Sec.  866, 
par.  5;  pp.  251-255,  Sec.  868-870. 


96      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

as  the  council  may  prescribe.'"  In  Nashville  the  board 
of  education  cannot  make  any  change  in  the  plan  of  in- 
struction and  organization  of  the  public  schools  "with- 
out first  securing  the  approval  of  the  city  council." '  In 
Houston,  any  applicant  for  a  teaching  position  in  the 
public  schools  must  first  present  to  the  mayor  a  certifi- 
cate "of  good  moral  character  and  of  correct  and  exem- 
plary habits;"  the  mayor  may  certify  such  applicant  to 
the  board  of  examiners,  and  no  appointment  may  be  made 
by  the  school  trustees  without  the  mayor's  certificate.' 
With  the  exceptions  noted  above,  the  general  tendency 
is  to  give  the  board  of  education  full  control  over  all  ques- 
tions other  than  the  budget  and  school  property. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  charters  of  two  of  the  cities  in 
Group  II  vest  the  board  of  education  with  full  control  of 
the  public  schools.7  To  these  should  be  added  the  third 
group  of  cities  whose  charters  grant  "home  rule"  in  all 
matters  except  control  of  the  public  schools. 

Of  this  group,  five  have  the  commission  form  of  gov- 
ernment and  one  has  the  city-manager  type. 

Of  the  27  cities,  constituting  Groups  II  and  III,  one 
gives  the  city  commission  entire  control  of  the  public 

CITIES  OF  GROUP  III 

Naming  the  cities  studied,  whose  schools  operate  under  the 
general  school  laws ;  and  giving  the  date  on  which  each  charter 
was  adopted. 

Ashtabula,    Ohio1 1914       Portland,    Oregon 1913 

Cedar   Rapids,    lowax 1909      Richmond,  Va.    (code  and 

Denvel,    Colorado  x 1914          Chater)     1910 

Des    Moines,   lowax 1912      Seattle.    Wash,  x 1914 

Lincoln,    Nebraska  x 1917      Tacoma,    Wash 1913 

Milwaukee,  Wis.    (code)  . .  1916      Toledo,  Ohio   1919 

Waco,  Texas   1914 

xCommission  form  of  government. 

'Buffalo,  Charter,  1916.  Art.  1,  pp.  260-267,  Sec.  290-304. 

"Nashville,  Charter.  1909,  p.  90,  Sec.  51. 

•Houston,  Texas,  Charter  and  Ordinance,   1914,  p.   306,   Sec.   949-951. 

TAlhambra,  Cal.,  Los  Angeles,  Cal. 

KMty  Manager  type. 


STATUS  01'  SUPERINTENDENT  IN  34  STATES  97 

schools ;'  four  give  the  city  council  or  commission  a  gen- 
eral control  over  the  schools  and  specific  control  over 
financial  and  certain  instructional  and  appointive  func- 
tions ;'  six  others  give  the  council  or  commission  a  strong 
control  over  the  budget,  and  purchase  and  sale  of  proper- 
ty;4 in  two,  the  city  council  has  only  a  very  limited  con- 
trol over  the  tax  levy  and  purchase  and  sale  of  proper- 
ty ;s  two  have  certain  home  rule  privileges  vested  in  the 
board  of  education  with  no  control  from  municipal  civil 
authorities ;'  the  remaining  twelve  operate  under  the  gen- 
eral laws  of  the  state. 

With  the  exception  of  the  control  given  to  the  civil 
municipal  authorities  in  four  cities  over  certain  instruct- 
ional and  appointive  functions,  the  charters  and  codes  of 
the  cities  studied  fail  to  show  a  single  provision  for  city 
school  administration  that  is  not  included  in  the  general 
legislation  for  city  school  systems  of  one  or  more  states. 

SUMMARY 

This  study  of  34  American  cities,  whose  charters  have 
been  adopted  during  the  past  decade  shows  that : — 

(1)  Ward  representation   for  members  of  the  board 
of  education  has  practically  disappeared. 

(2)  The  majority  of  boards  consists  of  from  five  to 
seven  members,  elected  by  popular  vote  for  a  term  of  four 
years. 

(3)  In  the  large  majority  of  cities,  the  board  of  educa- 
tion elects  the  superintendent  and  may  remove  him  from 
office. 

(4*)   The  superintendent  serves  four  years;  his  duties 

*Greensboro. 

lBuffalo,   Baltimore,   Houston,   Nashville. 

'Birmingham,  Berkeley,  New  Haven,  Providence.  Rutland,  San  Fran- 
cisco. (In  the  latter  city  control  is  vested  in  a  board  of  super- 
visors for  city  and  county.) 

"Dallas,  Atlanta. 

•Alhambra,  Los  Angeles. 


98      LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

are  to  advise  the  board  of  education ;  to  take  the  first  or 
initial  official  action  in  the  exercise  of  many  functions ; 
and  to  exercise  a  few  specific  functions  independently  of 
any  control  from  the  board  of  education. 

(5)  Practically  no  specific  provisions  for  city  school 
administration  are  made  by  special  charter  that  are  not 
also  included  somewhere  in  general  legislation  for  city 
school  systems. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  JUDGMENT  OF  LAY  AND  PROFESSIONAL 
LEADERS    IN    EDUCATION    AS    TO    THE 
LEGAL    STATUS    THAT     SHOULD    BE 
GIVEN  TO  THE  CITY  SCHOOL  SU- 
PERINTENDENT 

Opinion  goes  before  the  law.  For,  obviously,  in  a 
democratic  community,  only  such  opinion  as  is  strong 
enough  to  command  the  respect  of  a  majority  of  the 
legislative  body  can  ever  be  enacted  into  law.  And  in 
shaping  the  body  of  public  opinion  on  the  problems  in- 
volved in  any  profession  near  to  the  public  welfare,  it  is 
the  members  of  the  trade,  business  or  profession  whose 
thought  and  experience  must  give  direction  to  the  public 
judgment.  It  is,  then,  to  the  men  and  women  of  today 
who  are  most  intimately  connected  with  the  city  school 
systems,  that  we  must  look  for  guidance  in  shaping  any 
policy  or  expression  of  theory  as  to  the  best  scheme  of 
legal  organization  for  city  school  administration. 

To  secure  such  judgment  the  "form"  or  questionnaire 
given  below  was  prepared.  It  was  designed,  particularly, 
to  call  attention  to  and  secure  a  judgment  concerning  the 
three  phases  of  an  administrative  function,  viz.,  (i)  tak- 
ing the  first  official  step  or  initiative,  (2)  approval  of  the 
plan  or  recommendation,  (3)  actually  putting  the  plan  or 
recommendation  into  operation,  i.  e.,  executing  it.  Opin- 
ion was  also  sought  on  the  vital  question  as  to  whether 
any  revision  of  the  law  controlling  city  school  adminis- 
tration should  recognize  the  right  or  responsibility  of 
teachers  to  participate  in  the  exercise  of  any  administra- 
tive function. 

99 


City 


Position 


WHAT  SHOULD  BE  THE  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  THE  CITY 
SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT? 

This  form  is  designed  to  secure  representative  juditmenl  as  to  the  specific  re«nonsibiUty.  tint  should  tie  fixrd  by  law,  upon 
lupenntrndcnt,  teachers  And  board  of  education,  in  the  exercise  of  certain  function*  of  city  school  administration. 

Read  each  function,  and  check  (  O  UK  column  or  column!  which  yon  bebev*  represent  the  reapousibiliry  that  tbouU  be  nxed  by 
law  for  initiating  the  function.  Decide  whether  the  superintendent  or  hoard  of  education  should  actually  do  the  thing  i  e .  execute, 
and  check  accordingly.  Decide  whether  the  function  should  he  approved  before  evccutKM  or  after  execution .  and  check  for  approval 
If  von  believe  that  teachers  should  participate,  check  that  respective  column.  If  any  pan  of  the  fora  is  vague,  make  a  note  of  same 
and  explain  on  back  of  sheet. 


FUNCTIONS  of  City  School 
Administration 

Phasei  of  Responsibility  In  the  Exercise  of  Each  Function  That  Should  be  Determined  by  Stantte. 

Supt.  or  Executive 
'should: 

Officer 
Supt 

Board  of  Education  should: 

Teachen 
shoukl: 

Remarks 
CritKism 

loltiau 

Execnu 

Approve 

iDltiau 

Execute 

A£E* 

lion 

tion 

InUkue 

Panic* 

pate 

1.  Afp.i.u...t  0(1 

a.    niatlliill    •uorrSmeixlntii 

k  Knian.  Maaarn 

.  a.  tfeastarr  «•  Board 

AMadpd. 

<.T.catr. 

1  laallers 

a.  Cfcrt. 

a,  Armaacf  oeVcr. 

i.  Huhk.  rocnattkaal  aad  atcasl 

2.   T->»J«  oft 
..  T»tb^s    pri^p.b    ..J     - 
usum  Mipetiatcwiniu 

k  Hmhk.  rirnirtnMl  aad  —  '-' 

c.  All  «acr  0>|>107«» 

iJTtSrrZ     pfWtMfa     aad     •»     ' 
M»Uat    tup*Tinlnu1o>tt 

fc.  Huhfc.  rccratieul  ud  McimJ 

e.  An  wtbcr  emp4o>Mt  . 

4.    Pr*p.r.uoi>    ol   th«   Budf'l 

*.    Attnxbno: 
>.  Tiklat  o<<ra>» 

a.  Eafptviac    of    coapolMry    w 

Kataiur    b»* 

e.   nViU-t.  ud  CrowxU: 
.    Purcbur  aod  sab  of: 

a.  Pm»r.tioD  ol  plaas  fee  easy 

Z  Svrrriitaa  of  oaanmllu 

d.  Scii 

<-  MateMUU—  rrmin 

7.  Curricula:  Dotomtnatia.  ol 

k  Co.mt  of  »*,«» 

».  Makm*  of  ruU.  .od  rogsda- 

a.  «^d..*.!I."u^,"V«:tool  ,r» 

•nlm 

k   Nn  ixlicfcs 

«.   Srlntion    ofl 
a.  Tutbooka 

k  lamnraooal  mat** 

•>  Oaktr  laijln 

10    Onctaaa>  aad  S«.iiTliii. 
a.  htdkal  |-  11  —  |- 

k  CaunoB  tomato! 

^  Ort.  c™«,  MH~. 

d.  Ennlai  ataoob 

c.  CiiH.jHia      lull 

•••Initial""  Include*:  to  nominate,  to  recommend,  to 
move.    -Approval   before  execution"  meunx  the  rcsponslb 
rbe  particular  thintc  shall   be  done,  1.  e.,  executed.   "Kxt 
e.  g.,  the  actual  conversation  or  correspondence  with  n 
acting  os  agent  for  the  city  In  Ibe  purchase  of  land,  the  d 
after  execution"  Includes  (a)   Approval  of  routine  matte 
vlew.-as  a  means  of  checking  ur  guiding  future   action 
questions  on  appeal.  "Participate"  Is  UMH]  bereln   lo  lac 
the  Information  mid  noudble  Kultlancc  uf  superintendent. 

take  tbe  first  step  or  make  the  first  official 
Ity  for  deciding  beforehand   whether  or  not 
nt""   mfunt,  tbe  actual  doing  of   tbe  Ihlnir 
eecher  In   reference  to  her  appointment,   tbe 
reeling  it  the  making  of  repair*.  "Approval 
.   e.  K..  approval  of  bills,    it  i    High!  of  re- 
f  executive  officers,    fc)    The   settlement  «.f 
ude  any    recorded   Judument   of   teachers   foi 
f  roard  of  cilucntlun.  or  both. 

JUDGMENT  OF  LEADER 

The  judgment  was  sought  of 
education,  of  superintendents,  and  of 
leaders  prominent  because  of  their  influence  iiT 
thought  on  school  administrative  problems.  The  "fofnT 
was  mailed  to  136  superintendents  and  other  educational 
leaders  j1  105  replies  were  received.  The  first  hundred  to 
come  in  were  tabulated,  the  last  five  were  omitted ;  their 
inclusion  would  have  had  little  or  no  effect  on  the  results 
as  given.  Of  the  100  men  whose  replies  were  used,  91 
were  city  superintendents,  and  the  others  were  either 
university  teachers  of  school  administration  or  members 
of  state  departments  of  education.  With  possibly  one  or 
two  exceptions  all  of  the  non-superintendents  had  at  one 
time  or  another  been  city  superintendents.  The  super- 
intendents represented  cities  in  size  from  2500  to  nearly 
a  million  and  from  37  states  of  the  Union.  The  "form" 
was  also  mailed  to  100  other  superintendents  with  a  re- 
quest that  they  ask  their  board  of  education  or  a  member 
of  the  board  to  check  it  and  return  it ;  also  the  Secretary 
of  the  State  Federation  of  School  Boards  of  New  Jersey 
mailed  copies  to  about  50  boards  of  education,  asking  that 
some  member  check  the  same  and  return  to  the  writer. 
Forty-seven  replies  were  received  from  the  first  group 
and  nine  from  the  second.  These  were  tabulated  to- 
gether. Only  51  were  checked  and  one  of  these  being 
checked  only  for  "approval"  was  omitted;  the  remainder 
wrote  their  opinions  or  judgment  on  the  back  of  the 
"form."  The  replies  received  represent  cities  of  varied 
size  from  15  states.  The  data  from  professional  and 

'Three   factors  determined  the  selection   of   men   asked  to  contribute   to 
the  study : — 

(a)   Their  experience  and  reputation   for  having  helped   build  suc- 
cessful school  systems. 

(tO    Representative  cities  from  each  of  the  48  states. 
{f)   Representative  cities  ranging  in  population  from  5000  to  mor« 
than  a  million. 


IO2   LEGAL  STATUS  Of  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


TABLE    XXV.      RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    OFFICIAL    INITIATIVE 

Showing  the  per  cent,  of  100  educational  leaders  who  would 
vest  the  sole  power  of  official  initiative:  (a)  in  the  superintend- 
ent, (b)  in  the  board  of  education,  (c)  in  both  board  and 
superintendent,  (d)  in  teachers,  and  (e)  the  per  cent,  not 
checking  for  initiative. 

Administrative  Per  cent,  who  would  vest  the  sole 

functions  power  of  official  initiative  in 


Supt.     Bd. 

Appointment  of: 

a.  Assistant    Supts.  93 

b.  Business  Manager  62 

c.  Secretary  to  Board  24 

d.  Principals  97 

e.  Teachers  98 

f.  Janitors  72 

g.  Clerks  89 
h.  Attendance    Officers  94 
i.    Health,    Recreational    and 

Social  Workers  95 

Transfer   of  : 

a.  Teachers,   Principals  99 

b.  -Health,    Recreational    and 
Social   Workers  95 

c.  All   other   Employees  76 
Dismissal   of  : 

a.  Teachers,    Principals    and 
Asst.    Supts.  91 

b.  Health,    Recreational    and 
Social  Workers  89 

c.  All  other  Employees  76 
Preparation   of   the  Budget       82 
Attendance  : 

a.  Taking  of  Census  78 

b.  Enforcing    of    Compulsory 
Attendance  Laws  88          6 

Buildings   and   Grounds  : 

a.  Purchase  and  Sale  of          45        35 

b.  Preparation    of    Plans    for 
Construction  69        15 

c.  Supervision  of  Construction  42        41 

d.  Rent  48        32 

e.  Maintenance  —  Repairs  63        2f 


I 

10 


16 


Bd.  &  Teach-  Non- 
Supt.     ers     Class'd 


7 

28 

I            .  .            0 

67 

9 

3 

2 

12 

..      16 

2 

9 

2 

4 

5 

i 

14 


8 
15 

15 


15 
16 

19 
13 


JUDGMENT  Of  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS    IO3 

Administrative  Per  cent,  who  would  vest  the  sole 

functions  power  of  official  initiative  in 

Supt.     Bd.     Bd.  &  Teach-  Non- 
Supt.     ers     Class'd 

7.  Curricula:    Determination    of: 

a.  Subjects  to  be   included       95        . .  i         . .        4 

b.  Content    of    Subjects  85        ..          2         85 

8.  Making  of  Rules   and  Regu- 
lations  Governing 

a.  Routine  Matters  of  School 

Procedure  91          I          I          2        5 

b.  New  Policies  79        . .          9  12 

9.  Selection  of: 

a.  Textbooks  87        ..         ..          6        7 

b.  Instructional    Supplies  87        . .         . .          7        6 

c.  Other  Supplies  79          6        . .  i       14 

10.  Direction  and  Supervision  of 

a.  Medical    Inspection  89  i  2  . .  8 

b.  Class  Room  Instruction  91  . .  . .  3  6 

c.  Civic   Center  Activites  82  i  2  2  13 

d.  Evening  Schools  88  i  i  10 

e.  Continuation  Schools  87  i  i  i  10 

lay  leaders  will  be  treated  first  separately,  and  then  to- 
gether or  in  contrast. 

In  using  a  questionnaire  two  difficulties  are  manifest:, 
(i)  the  one  who  checks  to  show  his  judgment  may  not 
be  entirely  clear  as  to  the  meaning  of  any  particular  item 
of  the  "form;"  (2)  the  author  may  not  read  aright  the 
judgment  or  opinion  which  the  person  who  checked 
wished  to  convey.  In  order  to  safeguard  against  this 
second  danger  as  far  as  possible,  an  attempt  was  made  to 
analyze  the  replies  in  as  much  detail  as  possible  and  in  the 
terms  or  wording  of  the  questionnaire.  This  analysis  is 
contained  in  the  Code  for  Tabulating  Form  i,  and  is 
given  in  the  appendix  with  Table  C  which  shows  in  de- 
tail the  distribution  of  opinion  of  educational  leaders  con- 
cerning the  responsibility  for  the  exercise  of  each  of  the 
35  functions  named. 


IO4  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  OFFICIAL  INITIATORY  ACTION 

The  first  question  to  be  considered  is  whether  the  re- 
sponsibility for  officially  initiating  action  in  the  exercise 
of  each  function  should  be  vested  in  the  board  of  educa- 
tion, in  the  office  of  the  superintendent,  in  both,  or  in  the 
teaching  staff.  Table  XXV  gives  the  answer  of  the  edu- 
cational leaders  to  this  question  for  each  of  the  sub-items 
in  each  of  the  ten  functions  listed  on  the  questionnaire. 

The  third  column  of  Table  XXV'  shows  very  little 
tendency  to  make  both  superintendent  and  board  respon- 
sible for  initial  action ;  the  chief  suggestion  of  such  a  ten- 
dency is  in  the  initiating  of  new  policies. 

With  the  exception  of  the  appointment  of  business  man- 
ager, secretary  to  the  board,  and  janitors,  and  the  various 
functions  pertaining  to  "buildings  and  grounds"  more 
than  seventy-five  per  cent,  'would  place  the  power  of  ini- 
tiating action  solely  in  the  office  of  superintendent.  In 
fact,  90  per  cent,  or  more  would  vest  the  superintendent 
with  the  sole  power  for  officially  initiating  action  in  the 
exercise  of  the  following  functions : — 

1.  Appointment  of  assistant  superintendents,  principals, 
teachers,  attendance  officers,     health,     recreational     and 
social  workers. 

2.  Transfer  of  teachers,  principals,  assistant  superin- 
tendents, health,  recreational  and  social  workers. 

3.  Dismissal  of  teachers,  principals  and  assistant  super- 
intendents. 

4.  Determination  of  subjects  to  be  included  in  the  cur- 
ricula. 

5.  Making  of  rules  and  regulations  governing  routine 
matters  of  school  procedure. 

6.  Supervision  of  classroom  instruction. 

Table   XXV-A   gives    special    consideration    to   those 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS    IO5 


TABLE  XXV-A.      INITIATORY  POWERS  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION 

Showing  the  apparent  uncertainty  that  exists  among  education- 
al leaders  as  to  where  the  responsibility  should  be  placed  for 
taking  official  initiative  in  the  exercise  of  the  eight  functions  on 
which  there  was  less  than  75  per  cent,  agreement 

Per  cent,  of  judges  who  would 
vest  the  power  of  official 

initiative  in : 
Supt.  Bd.  of  Ed.  Supt.  &  Unclass- 


Bd. 


I.    Appointment  of: 

b.  Business  Manager 

c.  Secretary  to   Board 
f.  Janitors 

6.     Buildings  and  Grounds 

a.  Purchase  and  Sale  of 

b.  Preparation  of  plans  for 
Construction 

c.  Supervision       of       Con- 
struction 

d.  Rent 

e.  Maintenance — Repairs 


62 

24 
72 

45 
69 


28 
67 

12 

35 

15 


ified 

9 
9 

16 

15 

15 

16 
19 
13 


functions  in  whose  exercise,  less  than  75  per  cent,  of  the 
judges  agree  on  responsibility  for  initial  action. 

For  four  of  the  above  functions,  a  majority  would  place 
the  power  of  initiative  in  the  office  of  superintendent,  viz. : 
the  appointment  of  business  manager  and  of  janitors,  the 
preparation  of  plans  for  construction  and  maintenance- 
repairs.  In  only  one  function,  the  appointment  of  secre- 
tary to  the  board,  does  a  majority  clearly  favor  giving  the 
board  of  education  sole  power  of  initiatory  action.  There 
is  no  clear  majority  of  opinion  as  to  whom  should  be  le- 
gally responsible  for  initiating  action  in  the  purchase, 
sale,  and  rent  of  buildings  and  grounds,  and  in  the  super- 
vision of  construction.  The  large  number  of  unclassified 
answers  is  due  in  part  to  the  expressed  opinion  of  a  num- 
ber of  judges  that  in  these  functions  the  power  of  initia- 
tive should  be  vested  in  an  executive  officer  other  than 
the  superintendent. 


IO6  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

There  is  little  evidence  favoring  giving  the  sole  power 
of  initiative  to  teachers :  the  only  indication  of  a  tendency 
in  this  direction  is  the  vote  of  six  per  cent,  to  make  teach- 
ers solely  responsible  for  selection  of  textbooks;  seven 
per  cent,  for  the  selection  of  instructional  supplies;  and 
eight  per  cent,  for  the  determination  of  the  content  of 
subjects. 

INDEPENDENT   RESPONSIBILITY   OF   BOARD   OR 
SUPERINTENDENT 

Before  considering  the  division  of  powers  further,  it 
is  necessary  to  note  the  opinion  that  would  make  the 
board  or  superintendent  solely  responsible  and  independ- 
ent of  the  other  in  the  exercise  of  a  particular  function. 
Column  i  and  column  2  of  Table  C  represents  this  opinion 
respectively  for  the  superintendent  and  the  board.  Those 
functions  for  whose  exercise  10  per  cent,  or  more  of  the 
judges  would  make  the  superintendent  solely  responsible 
and  independent  of  the  board  are  listed  in  Table  XXVI- A, 
and  those  for  whose  exercise  sole  responsibility  would  be 
placed  in  the  board  of  education  are  listed  in  Table 
XXVI-B. 

RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    APPROVAL 

The  checking  of  the  questionnaire  for  "approval" 
was  not  as  clear  as  for  "initiative."  However,  three  dis- 
tinct phases  of  "approval"  appear:  (i)  Those  functions 
for  whose  exercise  the  initiatory  and  executive  powers  are 
vested  in  the  superintendent  whose  action  after  it  is  taken 
may  be  subject  to  approval  or  reversal  by  the  board.  (2) 
the  initiatory  powers  are  vested  in  the  superintendent 
but  the  approval  of  the  board  is  necessary  before  any 
executive  action  can  be  taken.  (3)  the  initiatory  powers 
are  vested  primarily  in  the  board,  but  the  superintendent's 
approval  is  necessary  before  any  executive  action  may  be 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS    IOJ 

TABLE   XXVI-A.     FUNCTIONS   FOR   WHOSE  EXERCISE.    IO   PER  CENT.  OR 

MORE   OF   THE  JUDGES   WOULD   MAKE   THE   SUPERINTENDENT 

SOLELY    RESPONSIBLE. 

Functions  Per  cent,  of  Judges 

2.    Transfer  of: 

a.  Teachers,  principals  and  asst.  supts 22    per    cent. 

b.  Health,    recreational    and    social    workers    22 

c.  All   other  employees    17      "        " 

5.    Attendance 

b.  Enforcing   compulsory    attendance    laws..     17 
a.  Taking  of  census   13 

7.  Curricula,   Determination   of : 

a.  Subjects  to  be  included 12 

b.  Content  of  subjects    . .  •  • 22 

8.  Making  of  rules  and  regulations  governing 

a.  Routine   matters    15 

9.  Selection  of: 

a.  and  c.  Textbooks,  and  other  supplies 11 

b.  Instructional    supplies    •  • 14      "        " 

10.  Supervision  of 

a.  Medical  inspection   15 

b.  Classroom   instruction    •  • 31 

c.  Civic   center   activities    14 

TA.BLE  XXVI-B.    FUNCTIONS  FOR  WHOSE  EXERCISE,  10  PER  CENT.  OR 
MORE  OF  THE  JUDGES  WOULD  MAKE  THE  BOARD 

OF  EDUCATION  SOLELY  RESPONSIBLE 
Functions  Per  cent,  of  Judges 

i.    Appointment  of   Secretary  to   Board 46    per    cent. 

5.     Buildings  and  Grounds 

a.  Purchase  and   sale 13 

c.  Supervision    of   construction 25      " 

d.  Rent    18 

e.  Maintenance — Repairs n      "        " 

taken.    The  judgment  of  educational  leaders  on  the  phases 
of  power  of  approval  is  given  in  Table  XXVII. 

The  principle  of  giving  the  board  initiatory  powers  and 
requiring  the  superintendent's  approval  before  executive 
action  is  taken  is  confined  almost  exclusively  to  those 
functions  concerning  which  25  per  cent,  or  more  of  the 
judges  disagreed  as  to  the  proper  placing  of  responsibility 
for  official  initiative.  (See  Table  XXV- A.) 


IO8  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
TABLE    XXVII.      THE    POWER    OF    APPROVAL 

An  analysis  of  the  replies  from  100  educational  leaders  to  show: 
(i)  How  many  would  vest  the  superintendent  with  power  of 
initiative,  subject  to  aporoval  by  the  board  either  after  (A)  or 
before  execution  (B)  ;  (2)  How  many  would  make  any  initiatory 
action  of  the  board  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  superintendent 
before  execution ;  (3)  How  many  did  not  differentiate  between 
initiatory  and  approval  phases  of  each  function. 

Administrative  Supt.  Init.       Bd.Init.  ^ 

Functions  Bd.  Ap.      SuptAp.  o" 

After  Before         B'f    Ex.  V 

Exe.      Exe.  Q 

(A)      (B)    (AB)  £ 

1.  Appointment   of 

a.  Asst.  Supts.  22  61  83  ..  17 

b.  Business  Manager  n  41  52  17  31 

c.  Secretary  to  Board  4  13  17  i?  66 

d.  Principals  38  45  83  . .  17 

e.  Teachers  50  33  83  .  .  17 

f.  Janitors  38  29  67  12  21 

g.  Clerks  48  31  79  5  16 
h.  Attendance    Officers  39  38  77  I  22 
i.  Health,     Recreational     and 

Social   Workers  41         40        81         ..         19 

2.  Transfer  of : 

a.  Teachers,     Principals     and 

and  Asst.   Supt.  60        14        74        . .        26 

b.  Health,     Recreational     and 

Social  Workers  55         13        68         ..         32 

c.  All  other  Employees  47          9        56          7        37 

3.  Dismissal  of : 

a.  Teachers,    Principals      and 

Asst.    Supts.  2\         52        73          i         26 

b.  Health,     Recreational    ;uid 

Social    Workers  25  47  72  2  26 

c.  All   otherEmployees  25  37  62  5  33 

4.  Preparation   of   the   Budget  10  53  63  2  35 

5.  Attendance  : 

a.  Taking   of   Census  36        22        58          8        34 

b.  Enforcing  of  Compulsory 

Attendance   Laws  48        13        61          3        36 

6.  Buildings  and  Grounds 

a.  Purchase  and  Sale  of  ..        20        20        24        56 

b.  Preparation    of    Plans    for 

Construction  3        34        37        14        49 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS         IOO, 

Functions  Bd.  Ap.       SuptAp.  ,» 

After  Before         B'f    Ex. 
Exe.      Exe. 

(A)     (B)   (AB)  g 

Administrative  Supt.  Init.       Bd.Init.  % 

c.  Supervision   of  Construction       9        25        34        21  45 

d.  Rent  4        32        36        i?  47 

e.  Maintenance— Repairs  n        29        40         10  50 

7.  Curricula :  Determination  of 

a.  Subjects    to    be    included  48        34        82         . .         18 

b.  Content    of    subjects  40        24        64         ..         36 

8.  Making   of   Rules   and    Regu- 

lations  governing 

a.  Routine  Matters  of  School 

Procedure  46        26        72         . .         28 

b.  New  Policies  19        55        74         ••         26 

9.  Selection    of : 

a.  Textbooks  44  26  70  2  28 

b.  Instructional    Supplies  47  22  69  2  29 

c.  Other  Supplies  41  23  64  9  27 
ro.  Direction  and  Supervision  of : 

a.  Medical   Inspection  40  28  68  ..  32 

b.  Classroom    Instruction  40  12  52  . .  48 

c.  Civic  Center  Activities  29  34  63  2  35 

d.  Evening  Schools  31  44  75  ..  25 

e.  Continuation    Schools  31  44  75  ••  25 

The  last  column  includes  all  cases  where  the  sole  exercise  of  a  func- 
tion was  vested  in  one  party,  either  board  of  superintendent,  and  all 
other  cases  where  there  was  no  check  for  "approval"  or  where  the  idea 
of  "approval"  was  not  delegated  solely  to  either  the  board  or  superin- 
tendent. 

In  the  exercise  of  three  functions,  half  or  more  of  the 
judges  would  give  the  superintendent  power  to  initiate 
and  execute  subject  to  the  board's  approval  after  execu- 
tion. These  are:  the  appointment  of  teachers;  the  trans- 
fer of  teachers,  principals  and  assistant  superintendents ; 
and  the  transfer  of  health,  recreational  and  social  work- 
ers. A  majority  would  vest  the  superintendent  with 
power  to  initiate  but  subject  to  the  board's  approval  be- 
fore execution  in  the  following:  the  appointment  of  as- 
sistant superintendents ;  the  dismissal  of  teachers,  prin- 
cipals and  assistant  superintendents ;  the  preparation  of 


IIO  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL,  SUPERINTENDENT 

the  budget;  the  introduction  of  new  policies.  The  com- 
bined figures  of  columns  A  and  B  show  that,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  the  appointment  of  secretary  to  the  board  and 
of  the  five  items  under  buildings  and  grounds,  a  majority 
of  the  loo  would  place  the  power  of  initiative  in  the  office 
of  superintendent;  and  the  power  of  approval  in  the 
board  of  education. 

RESPONSIBILITY   FOR  EXECUTIVE  ACTION 

Table  XXVIII  shows  the  distribution  of  check  marks 
for  execution  of  each  function.  Neither  board  nor  super- 
intendent has  a  majority  of  votes  for  executing  the  fol- 
lowing : 

Appointment  of  business  manager, 

Preparation  of  the  budget, 

Making  maintenance-repairs. 

A  majority  would  give  the  board  of  education  power 
to  execute  in  the: 

Appointment  of  secretary  to  the  board, 

Purchase,  sale  and  rent  of  buildings  and  grounds, 

Preparation  of  plans  for  new  construction, 

Supervision  of  construction. 

For  all  the  remaining  functions  a  majority  would  vest 
the  superintendent  with  all  executive  functions. 

THE    JUDGMENT    OF    MEMBERS    OF    BOARDS    OF    EDUCATION 

The  returns  from  members  of  boards  of  education 
showed  less  consensus  of  opinion  than  the  replies  from 
superintendents  and  other  educational  leaders.1 

A  few  of  the  replies  came  unchecked.  One  of  these  ex- 
pressed clearly  and  tersely  an  opinion  that  seems  to  be 
held  quite  generally  and  is  still  a  basic  principle  in  the 
laws  of  many  of  the  states.  The  paper  reads,.  . .  ."I.  . .  . 
return  the  blank  with  the  observation  that  I  think  the 
superintendent  should  legally  be  the  employee  of  the 

'Compare  tables  D  and  C  (appendix). 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS   III 


TABLE    XXVIII.      RESPONSIBILITY    FOR  EXECUTIVE    FUNCTIONS 

Showing  the  per  cent,  of  100  educational  leaders  who  would: 

(a)  vest  the  superintendent  with  sole  executive  powers; 

(b)  vest  the  board  of  education  with  sole  executive  powers : 

(c)  who   did  not  check  blank   for  executive   phase  of  the 
function. 

Administrative                Executive  powers  are  Non- 

IFunctions                              vested  in :  Classified 

Stipt.  Board 

1.  Appointment  of 

a.  Asst.   Supts.                          63  12  25 

b.  Business   Manager                 43  28  29 

c.  Secretary  to  Board                13  63  24 

d.  Principals                              68  12  20 

e.  Teachers                                70  n  19 

f.  Janitors                                    56  15  29 

g.  Clerks                                      66  n  23 
h.  Attendance   Officers             64  15  21 
i.  Health,  Recreational  and 

Social  workers                       68  11  21 

2.  Transfer  of: 

a.  Teachers,  Principals  and 

Asst.   Supts.                           86  3  H 

b.  Health,  Recreational  and 

Social  Workers                      82  5  13 

c.  All  other  Employees            65  12  23 

3.  Dismissal  of: 

a.  Teachers,  Principals  and 

Asst.  Supts.                            56  23  21 

b.  Health,  Recreational  and 

Social  Workers                       57  21  22 

c.  All  other  Employees            53  21  26 

4.  Preparation   of   the   Budget    41  24  35 

5.  Attendance: 

a.  Taking  of  Census                58  24  18 

b.  Enforcing  of  Compulsory 

Attendance  Laws                   66  20  14 

6.  Buildings  and  Grounds 

a.  Purchase  and   Sale  of         17  68  15 

b.  Preparation  of  Plans  for 

Construction                            27  50  23 

c.  Supervision  of  Construct.  29  54  .17 

d.  Rent                                       27  51  22 

e.  Maintenance — Repairs         33  46  21 


112   LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

Administrative  Executive  power  are          Non- 

Functions  vested  in :  Classified 

Supt.  Board 

7.  Curricula :  Determination  of 

a.  Subjects  to   be   Included   81  i  18 

b.  Content  of  Subjects  81  i  18 

8.  Making  of  Rules  and  Regu- 

lations Governing 

a.  Routine  Matters  of  School 

Procedure  78  5  17 

b.  New   Policies  66  3  31 

9.  Selection  of : 

a.  Textbooks                              71  8  21 

b.  Instructional    Supplies          74  6  2O 

c.  Other    Supplies                      60  14  26 

10.  Direction  and  Supervision  of : 

a.  Medical  Inspection  70  8  22 

b.  Classroom   Instruction  78  I  21 

c.  Civic  Center  Activities  71  6  23 

d.  Evening   Schools  70  7  23 

e.  Continuation   Schools  70  5  25 

School  Committee  and  should  act  as  its  agent  in  per- 
forming the  functions  placed  under  his  management  by 
the  School  Committee,  and  that  neither  the  superintend- 
ent nor  the  teachers  should  perform  any  functions  ex- 
cept as  directed  generally  or  specifically  by  the  School 
Committee."  The  statement  implies  what  another  mem- 
ber puts  in  words,  namely,  "It  is  well,  however,  for  the 
board  to  give  the  Superintendent  a  wide  scope  of  au- 
thority with  the  privilege  of  withdrawing  same  if 
abused." 

POWERS   EXERCISED    INDEPENDENTLY 

Twenty-five  per  cent,  or  more  of  the  board  members 
would  make  the  board  of  education  solely  responsible 
for:— 

1.  The  appointment  of  business  manager,  secretary  to 
the  board  of  education,  janitor  and  clerks. 

2.  Taking  the  census. 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS    113 

3.  Buildings   and  grounds: — 

Purchase  and  sale  of 

Preparation  of  plans  for  new  construction 

Supervision  of  new  construction 

Rent  and  repairs. 

The  functions  enumerated  above  are  with  one  addition 
the  same  as  enumerated  in  Column  B,  Table  XXIX 
which  shows  the  judgment  of  a  majority  of  board  mem- 
bers as  to  where  the  responsibility  for  official  initiative 
should  be  placed. 

POWERS    OF    APPROVAL 

An  analysis  of  the  data  of  Table  D  shows  that  from 
34  to  88  per  cent,  of  the  board  members  failed  to  check 
the  respective  items  for  approval.  Twenty-eight  per  cent, 
would  make  the  board  responsible  for  "preparation  of 
plans  for  new  construction"  subject  to  the  approval  of 
the  superintendent.  But  in  no  other  function  was  there 
any  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  board  members  to  make 
their  action  subject  to  the  superintendent's  approval. 
Table  XXX  enumerates  the  functions  for  the  exercise 
of  which  a  majority  of  board  members  would  make  the 
superintendent  responsible  for  taking  the  official  initia- 
tory action  subject  to  the  board's  approval  either  before 
or  after  execution. 

RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  EXECUTIVE  ACTION 

Current  educational  literature  assumes  that  the  super- 
intendent is  the  executive  head  of  the  school  system ;  but 
as  yet  the  assumption  is  an  ideal  that  is  only  partially 
verified  by  fact  or  practice.  The  truth  of  this  latter 
statement  is  indicated  in  Table  XXXI  which  shows  that 
the  majority  of  members  of  boards  of  education  consider 
the  superintendent  as  being  responsible  for  executive 
action  in  the  exercise  of  only  certain  functions. 


114  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 


TABLE    XXIX.      RESPONSIBILITY    FOR   OFFICIAL    INITIATIVE 

Enumerating  the  functions,  in  the  exercise  of  which,  50  per 
cent,  or  more  of  the  50  school  board  members  would  place  the 
power  of  official  initiative  in  (A). the  superintendent's  office,  (B) 
with  the  board  of  education. 


(A)  Per  Cent 

Appointment    of : 
Assistant  Superintendent     66 
Principals  82 

Teachers  84 

Clerks  54 

Attendance  Officers  74 

Health.   Recreational   and 
Social  Workers  52 

Transfer  of : 

Instructional    Staff  88 

Health,   Recreational    and 
Social  Workers  74 

Dismissal  of: 

Instructional  Staff  84 

Health,   Recreational   and 

Social  Workers  72 

All  other  Employees  54 

Enforcing  Comp.  Att.  Laws  66 

Curricula:  Determination  of 
Subjects     to      be      In-  • 
eluded  86 

Content  of  Subjects  78 

Making  of  Rules  and  Regu- 
lations   Governing : 
Routine  Matters  88 

New   Policies  62 

Selection  of : 

Textbooks  84 

Instructional    Supplies          86 
Other  Supplies  76 

Direction  and  Suoervision  of 
Medical  Inspection  68 

Classroom   Instruction  88 

Civic    Center   Activities       86 
Evening   Schools  82 

Continuation    Schools          74 


Per  Cent. 


(B) 

Appointment  of : 
Business  Manager 
Secretary  to  Board 
Janitors 

Buildings  and  Grounds 
Purchase  and  Sale  of 
Preparation  of  Plans 
Supervision    of   Construc- 
tion 
Rent 
Maintenance  Repairs 


60 

74 
50 

76 
50 

66 
60 

54 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS         115 
TA3LE  XXX.      POWERS  OF  APPROVAL 

Enumerating  those  functions  for  whose  exercise  50  per  cent, 
or  more  of  the  board  members  would  give  the  board  of  education 
power  to  approve  the  action  of  the  superintendent  either  before 
or  after  execution  of  the  act. 

lit   m    nil 

II        a8.       b*M 

Function  -T? .  ^i .  risi  • 

J3  fc-3  8       13  o  g  8        111*   . 

°  £  H  3         °  ^5  £  s  o  .«  •£  £>  M 

pq  13  2  3       M  ^  .5  S        H  -5  J3  .£  .S 

Appointment  of : 

Principals  14  40  54 

Teachers  20  32  52 

Transfer  of: 

Teachers,  Prin.,  etc.  24  34  58 

Health  Workers,  etc.  20  30  5° 

Dismissal  of : 
Teachers.    Principals  8  46  54 

Curricula,  Determination  of 

Subjects  to  be  included  28  30  64 

Content  of  Subjects  26  30  56 

Selection  of: 

Textbooks  30  32  62 

Instructional   Supplies  30  22  52 

Supervision  of: 
Civic  Center  Activities  28  36  64 

Evening  Schools  20  32  52 

The  following"  table  shows,  first,  that  for  15  of  the  35 
functions  enumerated  in  the  questionnaire,  the  majority  of 
the  50  board  members  have  no  clearly  defined  attitude  as 
to  where  executive  responsibility  should  be  placed.  Sec- 
ondly, the  data  show  that  the  majority  would  limit  the 
superintendent's  executive  responsibility  to  certain  func- 
tions closely  related  to  instructional  activities;  and 
would  hold  the  board  of  education  responsible  for  execu- 
tive action  concerning  all  functions  closely  related  to 
financial  or  material  aspects  of  the  school  activity,  e.  g.. 
appointment  of  janitors,  preparation  of  the  budget  and 


Il6  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
TABLE    XXXI.      RESPONSIBILITY    FOR    EXECUTIVE    ACTION 

Enumerating  those  functions  for  which  50  per  cent,  or  more 
or  the  50  board  members  would  make  (A)  the  superintendent  or 
(B)  the  board  of  education  responsible  for  executive  action. 

Functions  Per  cent,  who  would  vest 

executive  responsibility  in 
(A)  Supt.  (B)  Bd.ofEd. 
Appointment  of : 

Business  Manager  . .                        62 

Secretary   to    Board  . .                       76 

Janitors  . .                       68 

Clerks  50 
Transfer  of: 

Teachers,  Principals,  etc.  56 

Preparation  of  Budget  . .                       54 

Taking  of  Census  . .                        5- 
Building  and  Grounds 

Purchase  and  Sale  of  . .                       90 

Preparation  of  Plans  76 

Supervision  of  Construction 

Rent  68 

Maintenance — Repairs  . .                        74 
Curricula,  Determination  of  • 

Subjects  to  be  Included  62 

Content  of  Subjects  54 
Making  Rules  and  Regulations 

Governing  Routine  Matters  58 
Selection  of : 

Textbooks  5« 

Instructional   Supplies  58 
Supervision 

Classroom  Instruction  74 

Civic    Center    Activities  70 

Evening  Schools  56 

repairing  of  school  property.  Insufficient  as  the  data 
from  only  50  board  members  are,  yet  they  are  enough 
to  indicate  the  necessity  of  determining  just  where  respon- 
sibility for  such  action  should  be  placed. 

TEACHER  PARTICIPATION 

The  questionnaire  defined  Participate — "to  include  any 
recorded  judgment  of  teachers  for  the  information  and 
possible  guidance  of  superintendent,  of  board  of  educa- 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS        117 
'',      .  TABLE    XXXII.      TEACHER    PARTICIPATION. 

-N-aming  the  functions  in  the  exercise  of  which,  25  per  cent,  or 

more  of  either  group  would  approve  teacher  participation. 

Per  cent,  of  pro-  Per    cent,    of    lay 
Functions  fessional     leaders  leaders       favoring 

favoring   partici-  Teacher  Participa- 
pation  tion 

Preparation  of  the  Budget  28 

Enforcing  Comp.  Att.  Laws  35  J6 

Curricula.  Determination 

Subjects  to  be  Included  80  42 

Content  of   Subjects  76  42 

Making  of  Rules  and  Regulations 

,'  Governing : 

Routine   Matters   of    School 

Procedure  69  44 

New  Policies  62  44 

Selection  of : 

Textbooks  77  46 

Instructional    Supplies  70  42 

Other  Supplies  48  28 

Supervision  of : 

Medical  Inspection  28  20 

Classroom    Instruction  46  48 

Civic  Center  Activities  49  38 

Evening  Schools  39  32 

Continuation  Schools  39  26 

tion,  or  both."  Many  in  both  groups  would  also  give 
teachers  authority  to  initiate  official  action  in  certain 
functions.  A  majority  of  the  professional  leaders  favored 
teacher  participation  in:  the  determination  of  subjects  to 
be  included  and  the  content  of  the  curricula;  the  mak- 
ing of  rules  and  regulations  governing  routine  matters  of 
school  procedure,  and  new  policies;  and  the  selection  of 
textbooks  and  instructional  supplies.  More  than  40  per 
cent,  of  the  members  of  school  boards  took  the  same  posi- 
tion as  to  teacher  participation  in  each  of  the  above  named 
functions.  Both  lay  and  professional  leaders  practically 
agreed  concerning  the  functions,  in  which  teacher  parti- 
cipation should  be  encouraged;  however,  in  each  case,  a 


Il8  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

larger  percentage  of  professional  than  of  lay  leaders 
approved  such  participation.  The  per  cents,  are  shown 
in  Table  XXXII. 

Those  functions  for  whose  exercise  25  per  cent, 
or  more  of  the  professional  group  favored  giving 
teachers  the  right  to  initiate  action  included:  determina- 
tion of  the  content  of  subjects,  making  of  rules  and  regu- 
lations governing  new  policies,  and  selection  of  text- 
books and  instructional  supplies. 

SUMMARY 

The  foregoing  analysis  of  the  returns  from  lay  and 
professional  leaders  shows  little  consensus  of  judgment 
in  favor  of  vesting  the  sole  responsibility  for  any  admin- 
istrative function  either  in  superintendent  or  board  of 
education  alone.  In  fact,  the  majority  of  the  professional 
group  did  not  favor  giving  either  the  board  or  superin- 
tendent sole  responsibility  for  the  exercise  of  any  ad- 
ministrative function;  and  the  majority  of  the  lay  group 
favored  making  the  board  of  education  solely  respon- 
sible for  the  exercise  of  only  three  functions,  namely: 
the  appointment  of  secretary  to  the  board,  the  purchase 
sale  and  rent  of  buildings  and  grounds,  and  the  super- 
vision of  new  construction. 

Both  groups  differentiated  between  the  three  phases  of 
an  administrative  act.  Their  closest  agreement  was  on 
the  necessity  of  making  either  the  board  or  the  superin- 
tendent solely  responsible  for  taking  the  first  initial  ac- 
tion. They  did  not  agree  so  closely  in  differentiating  be- 
tween executive  and  approval  phases.  The  professional 
group  differentiated  the  approval  phase  from  the  other 
two  phases  in  all  functions  except  the  repair  of  buildings 
and  the  purchase  and  sale  of  buildings  and  grounds ;  and 
differentiated  the  executive  from  the  initiatory  and  ap- 
proval phases  in  each  of  the  35  functions.  The  lay  group 


JUDGMENT  OF  LEADERS  AS  TO  LEGAL  STATUS    1 19 

distinguished  less  clearly  between  executive  and  approval 
phases  of  a  function.  The  majority  of  them  checked  for 
"approval"  in  only  12  and  for  executive  responsibility  in 
only  20  of  the  35  functions. 

The  modal  judgment  gives  a  fairly  complete  picture  of 
the  judgment  of  the  two  groups,  and  the  responsibility 
that  they  would  vest  in  the  superintendent  and  board  of 
education,  respectively.  The  majority  of  the  professional 
group  would  make  the  superintendent  responsible  for 
taking  the  initial  step  and  also  for  executive  action  with 
the  board  approving  either  before  or  after  action  in  each 
of  the  35  functions  with  the  exception  of  appointment  of 
secretary  to  the  board  of  education  and  the  various  ques- 
tions pertaining  to  buildings  and  grounds.  The  appoint- 
ment of  the  secretary  they  would  leave  solely  with  the 
board  of  education,  and  for  the  various  questions  pertain- 
ing to  buildings  and  grounds  they  would  make  the  super- 
intendent responsible  for  the  initial  action  and  leave  the 
executive  action  in  each  of  the  five  functions  to  the  board 
of  education. 

The  lay  group  would  make  the  superintendent  respon- 
sible for  supervision  of  instruction,  and  would  make  the 
board  of  education  responsible  'for  ithe  appointment, 
transfer  and  dismissal  of  all  workers  connected  solely 
with  the  material  side  of  the  school  plant,  for  all  func- 
tions pertaining  to  buildings  and  grounds,  and  for  the 
taking  of  the  census.  For  all  other  functions  they  would 
place  the  power  of  official  initiative  in  the  office  of  super- 
intendent, but  differ  as  to  the  approval  of  administrative 
acts. 

Throughout  the  chapter  there  is  a  tendency  to  distin- 
guish between  those  functions  that  apply  directly  to  in- 
structional activities  and  those  that  pertain  more  closely 
to  the  physical  or  material  school  plant.  For  instance, 


I2O  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

the  professional  group  does  not  agree  unanimously  as  to 
where  the  responsibility  for  initial  action  or  for  executive 
action  should  be  placed  in  the  exercise  of  the  various 
questions  concerning  buildings  and  grounds  nor  for  the 
appointment  of  business  manager,  secretary  to  the  board, 
and  janitors.  To  this  group  of  functions  the  lay  group 
would  add  the  appointment  of  clerks  and  the  transfer  and 
dismissal  of  business  manager,  secretary,  janitor  and 
clerks,  the  taking  of  the  census  and  the  preparing  of  the 
budget.  But  in  the  appointment,  transfer  and  dismissal 
of  members  of  the  instructional  staff  and  in  the  various 
functions  pertaining  to  the  selection  of  textbooks  and  of 
instructional  material,  the  lay  group  would  make  the  su- 
perintendent responsible  for  executive  action. 

The  consensus  of  each  group  as  to  the  advisibility  of 
legalizing  teacher  participation,  was  confined  in  the  main, 
to  strictly  instructional  functions,  such  as  the  questions 
dealing  with  the  curriculum,  the  selection  of  textbooks  and 
supplies  and  the  making  of  rules  and  regulations  in  re- 
gard to  procedure  and  new  policies.  In  the  functions  just 
enumerated,  from  60  to  80  per  cent,  of  the  professional 
group  and  40  to  46  per  cent,  of  the  lay  group  favored 
teacher  participation.  The  only  other  marked  vote  favor- 
ing teacher  participation,  was  for  the  preparation  of  the 
budget,  which  was  favored  by  28  per  cent,  of  the  pro- 
fessional and  8  per  cent,  of  the  lay  group. 

There  was  close  agreement  between  the  two  groups  as 
to  the  placing  of  responsibility  for  official  initiative  in  the 
superintendent's  office  in  most  functions,  but  in  the  execu- 
tion of  these  functions,  where  the  professional  group 
seemed  to  be  in  doubt,  the  lay  group  registered  a  firm  be- 
lief that  the  'responsibility  should  rest  with  the  board  of 
education.  The  failure  to  distinguish  the  necessity  for 
fixing  responsibility  for  executive  action  was  marked, 
and  deserves  further  investigation. 


CHAPTER    VI. 

PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  IN 

THE  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  THE  CITY 

SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

Any  consideration  of  this  subject,  fundamentally,  must 
be  made  from  the  viewpoint  of  the  public :  to  think  of  it 
as  a  discussion  of  the  comparative  rights  or  privileges 
of  either  board  of  education  or  of  superintendent  would 
be  sheer  folly  and  waste  of  time.  This  report  is  con- 
cerned with  school  offices  and  school  officials  only  in  so 
far  as  the  legal  conditions  under  which  they  work  affect 
the  interests  of  the  public. 

In  one  sense,  the  administration  of  city  schools  is  a 
business  proposition.  More  than  one-third  of  the  total 
annual  expenditures  of  cities  is  invested  in  their  schools. 
School  sites,  buildings,  equipment,  supplies,  finances — 
all  taken  together  make  a  problem,  larger  than  the  finan- 
cial or  business  problem  devolving  upon  any  other  de- 
partment of  the  city  service.  The  people  of  the  city  are 
vitally  interested  that  they  should  obtain  value  received 
from  every  dollar  expended.  But  the  problem  is  more 
difficult  than  merely  a  business  venture,  where  the  ledger 
at  the  end  of  the  ^ear  discloses  the  amount  of  success  or 
failure  measured  in  dollars  and  cents.  The  school  ac- 
counting shows  expenditure  in  terms  of  money;  but  re- 
turns from  the  investment  are  to  be  found  only  in  the 
lives  of  boys  and  girls,  and  ultimately  in  the  lives  of  men 
and  women.  Such  returns  are  infinitely  harder  to  meas- 
ure; but  are,  also  infinitely  more  important  and  vital  to 
the  public  welfare  than  material  results  which  can  be 

121 


122  LEGAL  STATUS  OP  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

measured  by  money  values.  Both  from  the  standpoint  of 
the  cost  of  public  schools,  and  from  the  delicate  and 
highly  important  nature  of  the  work  of  the  schools,  the 
whole  question  of  administration  resolves  itself  into  find- 
ing and  safeguarding  an  organization  that  will  secure  the 
utmost  economy  and  efficiency  in  the  control  of  the 
schools.  Here,  as  in  the  business  field,  the  public  will, 
in  the  long  run,  interpret  economy  to  mean,  not  investing 
as  little  as  possible,  but  securing  the  best  possible  re- 
turns from  the  investment. 

The  discussion  of  the  previous  chapters  showed,  of  all 
the  various  arrangements  devised  for  city  school  admin- 
istration in  this  country,  that  the  office  of  city  superin- 
tendent is  the  most  unanimously  adopted.  The  laws  of 
every  state  provide  for  or  permit  such  official ;  and  every 
city  whose  special  charter  was  studied  has  its  superin- 
tendent. It  is  fair  to  assume  that  the  cumulative  practice 
and  experience  of  American  cities  for  the  past  100  years 
can  be  trusted;  and  that  the  office  of  superintendent  is 
an  accepted  fact,  with  no  substitute  arrangement  to  be 
considered, — rather  offering  only  the  opportunity  for  im- 
provement. 

The  direct  relationship  of  the  superintendent  to  the 
public  he  serves,  however,  is  not  so  definitely  established. 
In  San  Francisco  he  is  elected  by  popular  vote;  in  St. 
Paul,  he  is  appointed  by  a  commissioner  whose  specific 
responsibility  for  conducting  school  affairs  is  presumably 
neither  known  to  himself  nor  to  the  public  until  after  he 
is  elected  and  assigned  by  his  associates  to  the  conduct  of 
school  affairs.  The  superintendents'  appointment  direct- 
ly by  a  city  council  or  commission  has  been  tried  often; 
but  in  the  two  cities  entering  into  this  report,  has  been 
found  wanting  and  eliminated.  Election  by  popular  vote 
has  been  restricted  by  two  conditions:  (i)  the  choice  of 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  123 

candidates  has  been  confined  to  residents  of  the  city;  (2) 
Inability  to  free  the  schools  from  the  petty  and  ofttimes 
corrupt  political  intrigues  that  affect  constantly,  and  too 
often  demoralize,  the  administration  of  our  cities.  The 
election  of  a  lay  commissioner  who  in  turn  must  ap- 
point a  professional  superintendent  can  be  defended  on 
no  ground  whatsoever.  It  means  paying  two  high  sal- 
aries where  one  would  do ;  it  means  the  possible  extreme 
reversal  of  policy  at  every  election,  and  offers  always 
the  danger  of  the  schools  being  under  the  domination  of 
a  man  who  knows  little  or  nothing  about  the  professional 
side  of  the  public  schools,  and  who  uses  professional  ad- 
vice only  in  so  far  as  it  serves  his  fancy  or  purpose.  The 
almost  universal  practice  is  that  the  superintendent  is  ic- 
lated  to  the  public  through  a  board  of  education,  such 
board  to  be  responsible  directly  to  the  public,  or  indirectly 
through  the  city  commission  or  mayor  and  council. 

Theory  as  to  the  proper  function  of  the  board  of  educa- 
tion is  not  as  firmly  fixed  as  the  universal  practice  of 
having  a  superintendent;  but  any  discussion  of  the  func- 
tions of  the  board  leads  primarily  to  a  consideration  of 
the  exercise  of  those  functions  through  its  executive 
officers. 

One  theory,  still  extant,  considers  the  board  as  em- 
ployer, and  the  superintendent  as  employee.  This  theory 
is  held  by  a  considerable  body  of  the  American  public,  no 
doubt  controls  the  actions  of  school  officials  in  many  cities, 
and  is  a  force  to  be  reckoned  with.  A  more  refined  de- 
velopment of  the  theory,  that  has  much  to  be  said  in  its 
favor,  and  is  contributing  much  to  the  development  of 
city  school  administration,  looks  upon  the  school  district  as 
a  corporation,  the  public  as  stockholders,  the  board  of 
education  as  a  board  of  directors,  and  the  superintendent 
as  their  chief  executive  or  general  manager. 


124  LEGAL  STATUS  Otf  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

A  second  theory  looks  upon  the  superintendent  as  a 
state  official.  In  practice  this  theory  has  compromised 
itself  with  the  first  theory  stated  above ;  and  has  not  in  any 
place  succeeded  in  gaining  a  thorough  and  unqualified 
trial.  In  late  years,  however,  there  are  indications  in 
fields  closely  related  to  city  school  administration  that 
this  theory  is  to  have  a  considerable  trial  in  a  modified 
form,  where  the  superintendent  will  be  looked  upon  as  an 
executive  with  large  responsibility  and  the  board  of  edu- 
cation will  be  primarily  an  advisory  body. 

An  examination  of  the  various  phases  of  these  two 
theories  shows  certain  defects  as  well  as  merit  in  each. 
The  theory  of  the  superintendent  as  chief  employee  of 
the  board  grows  out  of  an  earlier  experience  of  American 
cities,  when  no  particular  training  was  considered  neces- 
sary for  conducting  the  affairs  of  the  city's  schools.  It 
loses  sight  of  the  fact  that  American  public  school  educa- 
tion has  reached  a  stage  of  development  where  its  admin- 
istration in  cities  requires  a  high  type  of  technical  skill 
and  ability,  to  be  obtained  only  through  a  long  period  of 
professional  preparation ;  and  that  for  society  to  secure 
such  professional  preparation  and  training,  a  fair  pro- 
fessional reward  must  be  given.  It  is  a  theory  that  ap- 
peals particularly  to  the  type  of  mind  that  dominates 
ward  politics,  or  that  ignores  the  value  of  technical  skill. 
Its  merit  is  best  considered  in  the  later  development  of 
the  theory. 

Since  administering  the  purely  material  or  physical 
affairs  of  a  school  system  requires  much  the  same  type 
of  ability  as  administering  the  affairs  of  any  business, 
it  has  been  but  natural  for  business  men  coming  into 
membership  of  boards  of  education  to  demand  that  the 
principles  of  business  organization  be  applied  to  school 
administration.  Likewise,  it  has  been  just  as  natural  thaf 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  125 

school  men,  desirous  of  improving  their  work,  should 
study  and  adopt  methods  of  business  organization  and 
administration  that  could  be  applied  to  school  affairs. 
So  far,  this  development  has  been  entirely  good  and  has 
worked  to  the  unquestionable  advantage  of  the  public 
schools.  But  there  is  a  limit  to  the  application  of  the 
theory.  The  stockholders  of  a  corporation  are,  so  far  as 
their  interest  in  the  board  of  directors  is  concerned,  a 
fairly  like-minded  group,  their  interest  is  altogether  or 
largely  in  the  money  returns  from  their  investment;  and 
the  dividends  they  receive  furnish  a  comparatively  sim- 
ple measure,  from  year  to  year,  of  the  capacity  of  their 
chosen  officials.  The  school  district  as  a  corporation  is  a 
much  more  intricate  and  complicated  organization.  It 
consists  of  every  sort  of  group;  its  stockholders  are 
divided  on  religious,  political,  social,  economic,  and  occu- 
pational lines ;  these  groups  are  often  pitted  against  each 
other,  so  that  pleasing  one  group  automatically  alienates 
the  support  of  another ;  moreover  many  of  the  so-called 
stockholders  are  unwilling  investors  and  would  not  be 
satisfied  with  any  returns ;  the  "returns"  are  immediately 
quite  intangible,  and  ultimately  to  be  known  in  the  work 
of  a  later  generation.  The  result  of  these  conditions  has 
been  to  make  the  work  of  school  superintendent  a  specially 
hazardous  undertaking.  Few  men  of  real  ability,  consid- 
ering the  limited  financial  reward  ahead,  care  to  invest 
the  years  and  money  necessary  to  gain  the  teaching  and 
other  experience,  and  the  technical  and  professional  edu- 
cation needed  for  successfully  doing  the  work.  And  under 
the  present  scheme  of  school  organization,  there  is  no 
assurance  whatsoever  that  the  men  who  invest  in  such 
training  and  education  will  be  permitted  to  continue  in  the 
work  for  which  they  are  specially  fitted.  In  view  of  the 
professional  aspect  of  public  school  work  and  the  peculiar 


126  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

conditions  and  influences  playing  upon  the  administration 
of  the  schools,  the  ideal  of  a  purely  business  organization 
of  school  administration  must  undergo  considerable 
modification  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  schools  as  they  exist. 
The  theory  of  the  city  superintendent,  as  an  adminis- 
trative officer  of  the  state,  if  adopted  in  its  entirety, 
would  make  a  centralized  state  authority  responsible  for 
appointing  the  city  superintendent,  for  supervising  directly 
his  work  and,  if  necessary,  for  removing  him  from  office. 
Such  a  theory  in  practice  would  tend  to  eliminate  most 
or  all  of  the  local  influence  from  the  control  of  schools, 
and  to  either  eliminate  all  public  interest  or  to  force  it  to 
find  expression  only  through  centralized  state  channels. 
As  yet  the  channels  of  public  thought  and  opinion  are  not 
clearly  enough  cut  to  readily  control  or  shape  state  ac- 
tion for  the  best  good  of  all  the  people ;  and  there  has  not 
as  yet,  been  sufficient  practice  or  promise  in  state  govern- 
ment to  justify  the  adoption  of  so  sweeping  a  program. 
Wherever  this  theory  has  been  adopted  to  any  extent, 
there  has  been  a  compromise  with  the  theory  of  local  con- 
trol that  has  usually  resulted  in  an  -attempt  to  delegate 
certain  powers  and  duties  to  the  board  and  other  powers 
and  duties  to  the  superintendent.  These  various  func- 
tions usually  overlap,  and  are  generally  so  vaguely  de- 
fined that  a  resulting  confusion  and  friction  between 
board  and  superintendent  inevitably  follows.  Dissatisfac- 
tion with  the  inefficiency  that  results  from  such  friction 
has  sought  a  remedy  in  an  extension  of  the  theory  of  a 
business  administration  that  would  make  the  superin- 
tendent a  strong  executive  and  the  board  of  education  a 
body  with  advisory  powers  only.  Massachusetts  has  ap- 
plied the  theory  to  the  state  board  of  education  and  state 
commissioner  of  schools.1  What  the  effect  would  be  if 


^Msachusetts  Educational  Legislation.   1919.   pp.   17-18.  Sec.   56-57. 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  I2/ 

the  theory  should  be  applied  to  city  school  administration 
can  be  only  conjectured.  The  same  powers  would  appoint 
both  board  and  superintendent,  so  that  the  two  would 
naturally  be  in  sympathy  with  each  other.  The  real 
power  and  responsibility  would  rest  in  the  person  and 
officer  of  superintendent,  although  board  members,  if 
tactful  and  in  close  contact  with  currents  of  public 
thought,  could  exert  a  strong  influence  toward  gaining 
public  support  of  school  policies  and  in  shaping  the  poli- 
cies of  the  superintendent.  Direct  public  influence  would 
be  limited  to  advisory  expression  and  to  pressure  on  the 
appointive  power.  As  a  means  of  eliminating  the  friction 
that  too  often  exists  in  school  administration  and  of  cen- 
tering responsibility  for  administrative  acts,  this  scheme 
offers  considerable  promise,  and  may  be  given  a  fair  trial 
in  city  school  administration.  Its  chief  defect  lies  in 
placing  so  little  responsibility  directly  on  the  public. 

There  is  a  strong  body  of  opinion  that  favors  giving 
the  public  at  large  more  power  than  it  now  has,  and  of 
educating  the  public  to  take  an  active  part  in  shaping  its 
affairs.  This  opinion  carries  with  it  the  correlate  that 
the  public  should  be  able  to  exert  a  direct  influence  on  the 
acts  of  its  public  officials.  This  opinion  is  in  harmony 
with  the  main  development  of  theory  controlling  city 
school  administration  in  the  United  States  during  the  last 
50  years  and  can  be  coordinated  with  the  theory  that  the 
superintendent  should  be  a  strong;  responsible  executive. 
The  remainder  of  this  chapter  looks  toward  harmonizing 
the  details  of  these  theories. 

There  is  a  fairly  unanimous  concensus  of  practice  and 
opinion  that  boards  of  education  should  represent  the 
city  at  large,  that  they  should  be  small,  and  that  a  major- 
ity should  continue  in  office  through  each  change  of  mem- 
bership. The  first  conclusion  is  an  expression  of  the  ob- 


128   LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

vious  principle  that  the  schools  must  be  administered  as 
a  whole  and  not  in  the  interest  of  any  particular  geo- 
graphical section.  When  representation  on  the  board  of 
education  of  small  geographical  units  is  altogether  elim- 
inated, and  the  chief  function  of  the  board  of  education  is 
to  secure  efficiency  in  the  management  of  the  schools, 
then  the  tendency  is  unquestionably  toward  small  boards. 
With  very  few  exceptions,  the  board  of  more  than  nine 
members  has  practically  disappeared;  and  the  board  of 
five  members  is  most  commonly  found  in  state  laws  and 
city  charters. 

Historically,  this  tendency  toward  smaller  boards  has 
been  accompanied  by  reduction  of  the  number  and 
gradual  elimination  of  committees.  The  committee  sys- 
tem was  primarily  a  means  on  the  part  of  boards  for 
dividing  their  executive  duties;  and  was  a  necessary  ar- 
rangement so  long  as  the  board  appointed  weak  execu- 
tives or  none  at  all.  Where  a  strong  executive  or  super- 
intendent is  employed,  the  executive  phases  of  all  func- 
tions should  be  assigned  to  him  and  his  subordinate  of- 
ficers. It  then  becomes  the  duty  of  the  board,  sitting  as 
a  whole,  to  advise  and  to  act  on  whatever  matters  come 
before  them. 

Whether  board  members  should  be  elected  by  popular 
vote  or  be  appointed  by  a  mayor,  mayor  and  council,  or 
commission  is  a  question  that  will  ultimately  require  a 
definite  answer.  The  laws  of  37  states  and  the  majority 
of  special  city  charters  studied  in  this  report  require  the 
election  of  board  members  by  popular  vote.  This  ten- 
dency is  in  entire  harmony  with  the  theory  that  would 
make  school  administration  responsive  to  public  initiative 
and  control. 

In  late  years  the  tendency  has  been  toward  longer 
terms  for  board  members  with  the  superintendent  em- 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  129 

ployed  for  the  same  term.  Two  forces  operate  here. 
Efficiency  of  service  requires  a  long  term  of  service. 
Popular  control,  in  its  present  state  of  development,  re- 
quires that  the  public  have  opportunity  to  change  its 
officials,  if  it  so  desires,  at  not  too  great  intervals.  In 
city  and  state  laws  where  the  superintendent  is  looked 
upon  as  a  strong  executive,  the  term  is  usually  four  years. 
For  a  board  of  five  members  a  term  of  five  years  would 
be  appropriate;  under  such  conditions  the  superintendent 
should  be  appointed  for  a  term  of  not  less  than  three  (3) 
nor  more  than  five  (5)  years.  Such  provision  would  in-, 
sure  the  superintendent  and  board  a  long  enough  term  to 
inaugurate  and  prove  the  worth  of  their  policies;  and 
would,  at  the  same  time,  allow  the  public  to  change  the 
administrative  policies  of  its  schools,  when  necessary, 
through  gradual  changes  in  the  board. 

It  is  generally  conceded,  however,  that  the  public  in- 
terest will  be  better  served  if  their  school  officials  serve  a 
longer  period  than  three  to  five  years.  The  law  should 
give  this  opinion  a  traditional  force.  This  could  be  done 
by  provding  that  the  superintendent's  reappointment 
should  be  automatic,  unless  either  the  board  or  the  super- 
intendent notified  the  other  on  or  before  six  months  pre- 
ceding the  date  of  expiration  of  the  superintendent's 
term  of  office  that  it  was  said  party's  intention  to  termin- 
ate the  relationship  on  that  date. 

RELATIONSHIP  OF  BOARD  AND  SUPERINTENDENT  TO  OTHER 
MUNICIPAL  OFFICES 

The  discussion  in  Chapter  2  of  this  monograph  showed 
that,  in  the  beginning  of  the  last  century,  responsibility 
for  city  school  administration  had  been  placed  largely  on 
local  municipal  officials,  that  the  tendency  since  then  has 
been  steadily  toward  lessening  control  of  such  officials 
over  schools  and  making  the  board  of  education  respon- 


130  LEGAL  STATUS  01?  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

sible  directly  to  the  people.  This  development  has  been 
in  complete  harmony  with  the  development  of  a  respon- 
sible administrative  control  of  public  schools. 

The  control  of  the  school  financial  affairs  by  a  city 
council,  and  the  instructional  affairs  by  a  board  of  edu- 
cation, is  a  dual  control  that  leads  to  unrest,  friction  and 
inefficiency.  The  board  is  held  responsible  for  providing 
good  instructional  facilities;  the  council  is  held  respon- 
sible for  keeping  the  tax  rate  low.  Even  when  both  au- 
thorities are  trying  to  serve  the  public's  best  interests 
they  are  handicapped  because  each  group  is  subject  to 
different  influences  and  different  bodies  of  public  senti- 
ment. It  is  generally  true  that  the  authority  which  con- 
trols the  school  finances,  ultimately  determines  the  qual- 
ity of  instructional  service.  Only  when  boards  of  edu- 
cation were  considered  primarily  as  executive  and  super- 
visory officials  was  there  any  reasonable  excuse  for  mak- 
ing them  directly  responsible  to  the  financial  control  of 
city  municipal  authorities.  As  executive  and  super- 
visory Authority  is  legally  more  and  more  vested  in  pro- 
fessionally trained  executives,  veto  and  approval  powers 
over  school  financial  policies  must  pass  more  and  more 
under  the  control  of  the  board  of  education,  or  the  lat- 
ter's  possibility  of  service  to  the  schools  will  be  entirely 
eliminated.  Where  boards  of  education  are  elected  by 
popular  vote,  they  should  be  directly  responsible  to  the 
public,  and  not  to  the  council  or  other  municipal  au- 
thority. Where  they  are  appointed  by  mayor  or  mayor 
and  council,  they  should  still  have  full  control  of  all 
financial  affairs  within  certain  limitations.  These  limit- 
ations should  be:  (a)  broad  enough  to  provide  for  all 
minimum  essentials  required  by  the  state;  and  (b) 
capable  of  being  extended  for  fixed  purposes  and  periods 
by  the  approval  of  the  same  municipal  authority  that  is 


PRINCIPLES  01?  GOVERNMENT    INVOLVED  13! 

responsible  for  appointing  the  membership  of  the  board. 
Such  an  arrangement  would  relieve  school  authorities 
from  the  necessity  of  year  after  year  fighting  for  the  es- 
sentials that  the  school  must  have  or  to  save  programs 
that  are  definitely  established  and  accepted;  on  the  other 
hand,  it  eliminates  the  danger  of  an  extravagant  board's 
levying  a  tax  that  would  seriously  handicap  the  city  ad- 
ministration, and  confines  argument  concerning  school  ex- 
penses to  the  questions  of  new  extensions  or  to  the  reten- 
tion of  services  which  have  had  time  to  prove  their  worth 
or  defects. 

RELATIONSHIP  OF    BOARD   AND   SUPERINTENDENT  TO 
THE  PUBLIC 

Too  much  legislation  in  America  has  been  directed 
through  fear  of  public  officials  rather  than  toward  help- 
ing such  officials  give  a  maximum  service  to  the  public. 
We  need  legislation  that  will  create  a  tradition  of  con- 
fidence in  public  servants  and  at  the  same  time  protect 
such  confidence  from  exploitation.  Such  traditional  faith 
in  public  servants  can  be  built  up  only  through  a  scheme 
of  complete  publicity  that  will  remove  all  doubts  on  the 
part  of  the  public,  and  all  temptation  toward  questionable 
or  secretive  dealings  on  the  part  of  officials.  The  ideal 
will  be  difficult  to  attain ;  but  certain  legal  provisions  will 
tend  to  build  up  such  public  confidence. 

(i)  All  board  meetings  should  be  open  to  the  public — 
all  regular  meetings  should  be  held  at  a  place  and  time 
known  generally  to  the  public.  Special  meetings  should 
be  limited  to  specific  purposes  stated  clearly  in  the  an- 
nouncement of  meeting — such  announcement  to  be  pub- 
lished or  posted  in  public  places  at  least  24  hours  before 
such  meeting.  Limitations  on  such  meetings  should 
provide  for  temporary  solutions  by  executive  officials  that 
would  hold  only  till  the  next  regular  meetings.  It  is 


132   LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

doubtful,  in  the  majority  of  instances,  whether  "executive 
sessions"  of  the  board  are  of  real  value. 

(2)  All  official  proceedings  of  the  board  should  be  pub- 
lished. 

(3)  Minutes  of  the  board  should  be  kept  in  the  super- 
intendent's office  and  should  be  open  during  office  hours 
to   the  public.     This  provision   should  require  that  all 
questions  passed  upon  by  the  board  be  presented  in  writ- 
ing; and  that  the  vote  of  each  member  be  recorded. 

(4)  The  superintendent  should  be  required  to  report, 
subject  to  the  board's  approval,  annually  or  oftener,  as 
to  the 

(a)  Condition  and  needs  of  the  school. 

(b)  Progress  of  the  school. 

(c)  Proposed  policies  or  programs. 

(d)  Achievement  of  programs  previously  proposed. 

(5)  Financial  reports,  and  proposed  budgets  in  de- 
tail should  be  published  on  or  before  a  certain  specified 
date,  and  hearings  held  at  which  any  citizen  might  speak, 
or  be  informed  concerning  any  item  of  the  proposed  bud- 
get. 

(a)  When  the  board  is  elected  by  popular  vote,  any 
proposed  expenditure  requiring  tax  rate  beyond  fixed 
limits,  should  be  submitted  to  public  vote  for  approval. 

(6)  Removal.     Where  elected  by  public  vote,  board 
members  should  be  subject  to  removal  through  the  "re- 
call." 

(7)  A  petition  signed  by  10  per  cent,  of  the  registered 
voters  of  the  city  should  be  sufficient  to  cause  board  and 
superintendent  to  take  action  on  any  proposal  submitted 
to  them  through  such  petition. 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT   INVOLVED  133 

RELATIONSHIP    OF    BOARD    AND    SUPERINTENDENT    TO    EX- 
ECUTIVE   AND    SUPERVISORY    OFFICERS,    TEACHERS, 
AND  OTHER  EMPLOYEES 

There  is  no  argument  except  tradition  for  a  dual  ex- 
ecutive authority  over  the  schools.  Such  dual  authority 
is  due  to  the  fact  that  municipal  authorities  gave  over 
last  of  all  to  the  board  of  education  control  of  material 
aspects  of  the  schools,  and  in  turn,  board  members  have 
maintained  their  hold  on  these  school  affairs  long  after 
they  realized  that  they  could  not  perform  the  duties  de- 
volving from  instructional  affairs.  When  cities  grew  too 
large  for  board  members  longer  to  attend  to  the  execu- 
tive duties,  it  was  but  natural  that  they  should  delegate 
the  work  they  looked  upon  as  specially  theirs  to  a  desig- 
nated official  directly  responsible  to  the  board  itself.  An- 
other factor  contributing  to  such  a  development,  no  doubt, 
was  the  fact  that  superintendents  received  no  training 
for  the  purely  business  affairs  of  the  school  other  than 
what  they  learned  from  actual  experience.  This  being  the 
case,  board  members  usually  had  quite  as  broad  and  oft- 
times  a  broader  experience  than  the  superintendent,  with 
the  result  that  they  discounted  his  ability  successfully  to 
direct  the  purely  business  affairs  of  the  schools.  These 
conditions,  however,  are  giving  way  to  a  new  order. 

The  purely  business  affairs  of  school  administration 
affect  directly  the  instructional  activities  of  the  school. 
The  quality  of  supplies,  every  detail  of  the  school  build- 
ing, the  character  of  soil,  size  and  form  of  the  school  site, 
the  character  and  quality  of  clerical  help  employed,  the 
efficiency  of  janitor  work — in  fact  every  detail  of  the 
varied  and  intricate  administration  of  the  physical  school 
plant  affects  directly  or  indirectly  the  quality  of  class- 
room instruction.  Educational  leaders,  cognizant  of 
these  facts,  have  developed  graduate  courses  in  univer- 


134  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

sides  for  training  superintendents  and  others  for  the  ad- 
ministration of  these  purely  physical  aspects  of  the  school 
plant.  Such  courses  go  into  every  aspect  of  school  finan- 
ces, buildings,  equipment  and  supplies,  forming  of  the 
budget,  and  preparing  plans  for  new  construction.  The 
result  of  this  development  is  that  the  superintendent  can 
now  obtain  technical  training  in  every  phase  of  school 
administration,  and  ultimately  the  public  will  choose  men 
who  have  the  technical  training  in  addition  to  the  prac- 
tical experience. 

Since  the  business  affairs  of  the  school  are  intimately  a 
part  of  the  instructional  affairs,  since  the  training  of 
school  superintendents  includes  both  business  and  in- 
structional technique,  the  desirability  of  having  all  execu- 
tive authority  centered  in  one  officer  is  apparent.  The 
officer  now  known  in  some  states  as  business  manager, 
should  be  made  an  assistant  superintendent  in  charge  of 
business  affairs.  The  office  heretofore  known  as  secre- 
tary to  the  board  of  education  should  be  abolished  and  the 
duties  of  said  office  be  transferred  to  the  office  of  secre- 
tary to  the  superintendent.  The  superintendent  and  the 
board  constitute  one  body  or  authority;  their  powers  are 
not  dual  but  unified;  therefore  their  secretarial  duties 
should  be  unified  and  under  one  head.  The  only  reason 
for  existence  of  a  secretarial  force  is  directly  or  indirectly 
to  promote  the  instructional  work  of  the  school ;  directing 
such  secretarial  force  is  primarily  an  executive  function, 
therefore  the  chief  secretary  of  the  schools  should  be  con- 
sidered an  executive  officer,  responsible  directly  to  the 
superintendent  of  schools  and  through  him  to  the  board 
of  education.  The  work  of  all  executive  and  supervisory 
officers  of  the  school  should  be  coordinated  and  under  the 
direction  and  supervision  of  the  superintendent.  Through 
him,  should  pass  all  communications  between  the  board 


PRINCIPLES  OP  GOVERNMENT   INVOLVED  135 

on  the  one  hand  and  school  officers,  teachers,  and  em- 
ployees on  the  other. 

Such  centralization  of  authority,  however,  does  not 
mean  creating  the  possibility  of  an  autocratic,  tyrannical 
school  administration.  The  powers  and  duties  of  each 
office  or  type  of  position  should  be  defined  in  outline  by 
law;  and  in  detail  by  rules  and  regulations  of  the  board, 
(changing  such  rules  should  be  possible  only  under  care- 
fully specified  conditions). 

The  superintendent  should  have  a  council  composed 
of  members  representing  executive  and  supervisory  of- 
ficers, teachers,  and  other  employees.  These  representa- 
tives should  be  in  close  contact  with  every  member  of 
the  school  group.  Its  power  should  be  advisory  only ;  but 
every  question  of  policy  formulated  by  the  superintendent 
should  be  the  result  of  conference  with  his  council.  The 
minutes  of  the  meetings  should  be  recorded ;  and  its  min- 
ority reports  should  be  filed  and  should  go  to  the  board 
with  the  majority  report  if  the  minority  so  desired. 

Tenure  ought  to  be  secured  without  the  alternate  danger 
of  fixing  incompetent  people  in  important  positions.  After 
a  probational  term,  reappointment  should  be  automatic. 
Notice  of  non-appointment  should  be  subject  to  the  de- 
mand for  a  hearing  based  on  written  charges.  The  term 
for  all  executive  officers  should  be  for  the  same  period 
as  superintendent  and  board  members. 

RELATIONSHIP   OF   BOARD   AND    SUPERINTENDENT    TO    EACH 
OTHER — THEIR  POWERS  AND  DUTIES 

I.  APPOINTIVE.  In  late  years,  school  law  has  recog- 
nized the  necessity  for  making  the  superintendent  respon- 
sible for  finding  and  recommending  suitable  teachers  to 
the  board.  This  means  that  no  candidate  for  a  teaching 
position  can  be  considered  by  the  board  unless  first  nom- 
inated by  the  superintendent.  The  board's  power  is  con- 


136   LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

fined  to  approval  or  rejection  of  the  superintendent's  re- 
commendation. This  plan  has  certain  advantages  over 
the  older  law  that  placed  the  appointive  power  directly 
in  the  board  of  education,  (i)  It  relieves  board  mem- 
bers from  the  necessity  of  having  to  consider  many  ap- 
plications of  persons  totally  unfit  for  teaching  positions. 
(2)  It  insures  the  public  that  the  one  person  most  direct- 
ly responsible  and,  all  things  considered,  the  best  fitted, 
namely,  the  superintendent,  shall  pass  favorably  upon 
every  candidate  before  there  is  any  possibility  of  that 
candidate's  being  appointed.  (3)  The  superintendent 
knowing  that  he,  and  not  the  board,  must  assume  respon- 
sibility for  any  failure  on  the  part  of  teachers  will 
naturally  exercise  greater  care  than  if  he  could  shift  the 
blame  to  the  board  of  education. 

When  it  is  admitted  that  the  superintendent  can  and 
should  be  held  responsible  for  the  direction  and  super- 
vision of  all  activities  pertaining  to  the  schools,  then  it 
is  necessary  that  his  appointive  powers  be  extended  to 
include  all  workers  in  the  school  system. 

Obviously,  he  cannot  secure  most  efficient  service  un- 
less his  control  affects  the  original  appointments,  trans- 
fers, dismissals  and  promotions.  The  application  of  this 
principle  includes  in  addition  to  principals,  supervisors 
and  teachers,  the  appointment  of  all  officers  and  employees 
concerned  with  the  physical  school  plant;  attendance, 
health,  recreational,  social,  and  clerical  workers. 

The  question  arises  as  to  whether  the  same  relation- 
ship in  appointive  powers  should  hold  between  the  board 
and  superintendent  for  all  grades  of  positions. 

Three  main  grades  of  positions  have  developed  in  the 
law:  (i)  executive  and  supervisory,  (2)  teachers  and 
positions  of  equivalent  grade,  (3)  other  employees.  The 
first  includes  assistant  superintendents,  business  manager, 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT   INVOLVED  137 

secretary,  chief  engineer,  principals,  heads  of  medical  in- 
spection, nursing,  recreation,  attendance,  etc.  Positions 
equivalent  in  grade  to  teachers  include  all  positions  re- 
quiring equivalent  experience  and  training.  All  remain- 
ing positions  are  classified  under  "other  employees." 

The  first  responsibility  for  administration  of  any  policy 
or  program  recommended  by  the  superintendent  and 
adopted  by  the  board,  rests  with  executive  and  super- 
visory officials:  these  should  be  most  responsive  to  need 
of  change  of  policy  as  dictated  by  public  opinion  ex- 
pressed at  the  polls  or  through  appointment  to  the  board 
of  education.  For  this  group  of  appointments,  respon- 
sibility should  rest  on  the  board  and  superintendent. 
The  superintendent  should  nominate,  and  after  the  board's 
approval  of  such  nomination  should  appoint.  The  same 
rule  or  procedure  should  apply  to  the  appointment  of 
teachers  with  this  exception — boards  should  be  permitted 
to  delegate  the  full  power  of  appointment  of  teachers  to- 
the  superintendent,  subject  only  to  his  reporting  all  such 
appointments  to  the  board  at  its  next  regular  meeting. 
All  other  employees  should  be  appointed  'by  the  super- 
intendent and  a  full  report  of  such  appointments  made 
to  the  board  at  its  next  regular  meeting.  Civil  service 
rules  should  apply  to  this  class  of  employees ;  where  civil 
service  does  not  apply,  the  superintendent  should  pre- 
pare rules  concerning  all  phases  of  the  appointive  powers ; 
such  rules  should  be  approved  by  the  board  of  education 
and  by  the  state  centralized  educational  authority. 

Transfer — The  power  to  transfer  officers,  teachers, 
and  other  employees,  to  positions  of  the  same  grade,  rank 
and  salary  should  rest  solely  with  the  superintendent. 

Transfers  to  positions  of  different  rank,  grade  or  salary 
should  be  subjejct  to  the  same  requirements  as  those  gov- 
erning original  appointments  or  to  the  rules  and  regula- 
tions of  the  civil  service. 


138  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

Promotion — Should  be  controlled  by  the  rules  govern- 
ing original  appointments. 

Suspension — Should  rest  with  the  superintendent  on 
his  own  motion  or  in  approval  of  motion  made  by  re- 
sponsible subordinate  officer. 

Dismissal — For  officers  and  teachers,  final  power  of 
dismissal  should  rest  with  the  board.  All  charges  should 
come  before  the  board  through  the  superintendent  and  in 
writing.  Such  charges  should  be  made  by  the  superin- 
tendent on  his  own  motion ;  or,  if  made  as  an  appeal  from 
the  superintendent's  decision,  they  should  be  accompanied 
by  a  brief  setting  forth  his  reasons  for  such  decision.  A 
copy  of  said  charges  and  notice  of  leaving  should  be  pre- 
sented to  the  party  concerned;  said  party  should  decide 
whether  or  not  each  party  should  have  counsel  at  such 
hearing.  If  the  board  sustains  the  superintendent's 
recommendations,  the  decision  should  be  final.  If  the 
board  does  not  sustain  the  superintendent's  recommenda- 
tion, said  party  should  have  the  right  to  appeal  to  the 
state  commissioner  of  education  whose  decision  should  be 
final.  Dismissal  of  "other  employees"  should  be  subject 
to  rules  and  regulations  of  the  civil  service ;  or  such  sub- 
stitute rules  as  are  suggested  above  under  rules  for  ap- 
pointment. 

All  appointive  powers  of  the  superintendent  should  be 
exercised  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consultation  of  sub- 
ordinate executive  officers  responsible  for  the  immediate 
direction  and  supervision  of  such  teachers,  workers  or 
employees. 

(2)  BUDGETARY  POWERS.  This  power  affects  the 
efficiency  of  every  single  phase  of  the  school  activity. 

An  older  theory  assumed  that  direct  representatives  of 
the  people  should  control  the  purse  strings ;  and  that  ex- 
ecutive officers  should  make  the  best  of  whatever  amounts 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  139 

might  be  allotted  to  them.  Certain  conditions  and  fac- 
tors have  tended  to  counteract  this  older  theory,  (i) 
Board  of  education  members  when  approaching  the  bud- 
get problems  are  under  many  and  different  forms  of 
pressure,  so  that  they  are  not  always  able  to  give  unbiased 
thought  and  judgment  to  the  many  problems  involved. 
(2)  City  schools  are  so  expensive  and  their  work  so  far- 
reaching,  that  any  party  responsible  for  preparing  the 
school  budget,  needs  the  most  accurate  and  technical  in- 
formation possible  to  attain.  (3)  The  state  now  requires 
certain  minimum  essentials  for  each  city  school  system 
and  needs  one  official  on  the  grounds  technically  equipped 
to  safeguard  the  state's  interest.  (4)  Cities  have  found 
that  short-sighted  and  bungled  budgetary  or  financial 
programs  have  proved  most  costly  in  the  end,  and  are  dis- 
posed to  obtain  the  best  advice  and  fullest  publicity  for 
the  same. 

The  superintendent  should  be  responsible  for  prepara- 
tion of  the  budget.  As  expert  and  professional  advisor 
of  the  board  the  superintendent  is  in  position  to  collect  and 
obtain  the  facts  which  the  board  needs  for  exercising  their 
best  judgment.  Likewise  he  is  best  fitted  to  know  and  to 
plan  for  meeting  the  requirements  of  the  state.  The  ad- 
vice and  cooperation  of  all  groups  of  workers  should  be 
utilized  by  the  superintendent  in  developing  his  budgetary 
program.  Such  advice  and  cooperation  should  be  ob- 
tained through  the  superintendent's  council.  Minority 
reports  of  this  council  should  be  available  for  the  consid- 
eration of  the  board. 

The  budget  prepared  by  the  superintendent  should 
itemize  the  appropriation  required  for  each  service,  and 
compare  the  same  with  the  appropriation  and  expenditure 
for  the  two  preceding  years,  and  for  any  other  years  that 
might  be  deemed  advisable.  It  should  also  give  reasons 


I4O  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

for  increase  or   decrease,  or  for  inclusion  or  exclusion  of 
any  item  as  compared  with  the  two  previous  budgets. 

(1)  Such  information  gives  th'e  board  a  sound  basis 
for  exercising  their  judgment. 

(2)  It  compels  the  superintendent  and  his  associates  to 
think  ahead,  plan  far-reaching  programs,  and  to  check 
scientifically  the  results  of  each  school  program  under- 
taken. 

(3)  It  is  the  basis  for  full  publicity,  and  when  pub- 
lished keeps  the  public  informed,  interested  and  in  sym- 
pathy with  the  varied  school  program. 

When  the  budget  as  presented  by  the  superintendent  is 
not  approved,  the  advice  and  objections  of  the  board 
should  be  reduced  to  writing;  and  the  budget  should  be 
revised  by  the  superintendent  with  the  advice  and  cooper- 
ation of  his  associates.  While  the  necessity  for  final 
decision  rests  on  the  direct  representatives  of  the  people, 
the  above  provision  reduces  the  probability  of  hasty  ac- 
tion, and  gives  all  parties  concerned  the  advantage  of 
having  the  best  thought  and  advice  of  those  directly  re- 
sponsible for  the  administration  of  the  budget. 

(3)  COMPULSORY  EDUCATION.  Responsibility  for  en- 
forecement  should  rest  entirely  on  the  superintendent. 
The  board  of  education  should  be  responsible  for  appoint- 
ing such  officials  and  employees  as  will  enable  the  super- 
intendent to  perform  his  duties.  Enforcement  of  com- 
pulsory education  is  strictly  an  executive  function.  Suc- 
cess of  administration  depends  upon  promptness.  School 
law  generally  has  designated  the  superintendent  as  the 
local  agent  who  should  exercise  this  power. 

Continuation  school  programs  and  child  labor  legisla- 
tion make  it  all  the  more  necessary  that  the  local  admin- 
istration of  school  attendance  should  be  centered  in  re- 
sponsible offices  and  subject  only  to  the  appellate  juris-i 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  14! 

diction  of  state  centralized  educational  authority  or  ad- 
ministrative courts.  The  state  is  directly  responsible 
for  the  education  of  all  children  and  for  the  eradication 
of  illiteracy.  State  officials  obviously  cannot  cover  ef- 
fectively and  efficiently  every  district  of  the  state  without 
enormous  expense.  Consolidation  of  enforcement  of  all 
phases  of  school  attendance  in  local  offices  means  econ- 
omy and  efficiency  in  execution. 

The  basis  of  all  compulsory  attendance  enforcement 
should  be  a  continuous  school  census.  Either  the  super- 
intendent should  be  given  assistance  needed  to  keep  such 
a  census  in  connection  with  the  school  attendance  bureaus, 
or  the  law  should  require  police  departments  and  health 
bureaus  to  obtain  and  supply  such  information  to  the  office 
of  city  school  superintendent. 

(4)  DIRECTION  AND  SUPERVISION.  Responsibility  for 
direction  and  supervision  should  be  lodged  in  the  superin- 
tendent of  schools  and  his  associate  executive  and  super- 
visory officers — their  action  subject  to  the  approval  of  the 
board.  To  place,  legally,  the  responsibility  for  direction 
and  supervision  of  any  school  activity  in  the  board  of  edu- 
cation, implies  giving  the  board  an  executive  function, 
for  which  it  is  neither  fitted  or  prepared,  nor  capable  of 
exercising. 

The  superintendent  and  his  associate  executive  and  su- 
pervisory officers  should  keep  the  board  fully  informed 
and  advised  as  to  policies,  programs,  needs,  conditions, 
and  progress  of  their  various  activities;  and  should  at 
regular  board  meetings,  give  through  the  superintendent, 
such  additional  information  as  the  board  might  request. 
Such  full  reports  give  the  board  members  a  more  intelli- 
gent background  for  judging  the  directive  and  supervi- 
sory work  of  their  appointed  officials  than  they  could  gain 
from  occasional  visits.  Further,  such  reports  give  the 


142   LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

board  opportunity  to  advise  as  to  continuance,  or  redirec- 
tion of  policy,  and  to  give  directly  expression  to  such  pub- 
lic opinion  as  they  may  be  in  contact  with.  In  extreme 
cases,  this  provision  would  give  the  board  a  veto  power 
over  such  directive  and  supervisory  activity  as  it  might 
consider  questionable  from  the  standpoint  of  the  best  in- 
ests  of  the  school. 

(5)  RULES  AND  REGULATIONS — NEW  POLICIES — Deci- 
sion as  to  rules  and  regulations  concerning  details  of 
school  procedure  should  rest  with  the  superintendent,  ad- 
vised by  his  executive  council,  in  so  far  as  such  decisions 
concern  primarily  executive  phases  of  policies  already 
adopted.  New  policies  or  change  of  policy  should  come 
about  in  either  of  two  ways :  ( i )  The  superintendent 
acting  with  the  advice  of  his  council  should  recommend  in 
writing  such  change  of  policy  to  the  board  of  education ; 
with  the  approval  of  the  board  such  policy  should  become 
a  part  of  the  school  procedure.  (2)  The  board  should 
have  the  privilege  of  proposing  new  policies.  Such  pro- 
posal should  be  submitted  to  the  superintendent  who,  with 
the  advice  of  his  council,  should  report  in  writing  to  the 
board  at  its  next  regular  meeting  his  recommendations 
concerning  such  proposal.  After  due  consideration,  final 
decision  should  rest  with  the  board. 

Such  a  provision  safeguards  the  public  in  three 
ways:  (i)  It  looks  to  the  superintendent,  the  best  pro- 
fessional authority  of  the  city,  for  the  formulation  of  all 
school  policies.  (2)  It  gives  the  representatives  of  the 
people  power  to  formulate  and  enforce  new  policies  in 
conformity  with  public  opinion,  in  case  the  superintendent 
should  seem  to  stand  in  the  way  of  progress.  (3)  It  re- 
duces the  possibility  of  haste  and  lack  of  thought  in 
grafting  new  policies  on  to  the  school  system  and  re- 
quires that  the  proposal  shall  pass  under  the  scrutiny  and 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  143 

stand  the  recorded  judgment  of  those  responsible  for  ad- 
ministering it. 

RELATIONSHIP  OF  CITY  DISTRICT  TO  THE  COUNTY 

The  county  superintendent  and  city  superintendent 
should  be,  in  the  law,  officials  of  equivalent  grade  and  re- 
sponsibility. In  the  older  law,  before  cities  were  con- 
solidated and  city  superintendents  considered  strong  ex- 
ecutives, the  county  superintendent  was  considered  a  state 
official  responsible  for  administration  of  state  law  in  a 
limited  section  of  the  state.  His  chief  function  was  the 
administration  of  state  funds.  His  other  functions,  ap- 
plicable to  cities,  have  largely  been  given  over  to  the  city 
superintendent.  Distribution  of  state  funds  for  cities 
should  be  made  directly  to  cities  through  the  city  super- 
intendent or  treasurer  of  city  schools. 

RELATIONSHIP  OF  STATE  TO  CITY  SCHOOL  ADMINISTRATION 

Superintendent.  The  state  board  of  education  should 
approve  rules  and  regulations  for  determining  the  qualifi- 
cations and  qualities  necessary  for  certification  and  en- 
dorsement of  superintendents  for  different  grades  of  su- 
perintendencies.  The  state  is  definitely  interested  to  know 
that  the  schools  of  each  city  shall  be  administered  as  well 
as  they  can  be.  The  people  of  each  city  want  to  know 
that  the  qualifications  of  the  man  or  woman  who  shall 
head  their  school  system  has  been  adjudged  satisfactory 
by  an  authority  competent  for  such  responsibility.  The 
state  commissioner  should  have  the  power  of  veto  or  ap- 
proval of  all  appointments  of  superintendents  made  by 
boards  of  education. 

The  state  is  responsible  for  the  education  of  the  chil- 
dren of  the  state.  There  must  be  an  agent  in  each  dis- 
trict of  the  state  responsible  in  some  measure  to  state 
authority.  Historically  and  logically,  the  superintendent 
meets  the  requirement.  Yet,  the  provision  still  leaves  the 


144   LKCAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

local  representatives  responsible  for  selection  and  initial 
approval  of  the  appointee. 

Approval  of  local  initiative.  The  state  educational  de- 
partment should  have  power  of  approval  over:  school 
sites,  plans  for  new  construction,  curricula,  and  new  de- 
velopment of  school  activity. 

Such  procedure  provides:  (i)  that  local  initiative  is 
safeguarded  and  that  each  city  has  opportunity  to  develop 
along  lines  that  are  best  suited  to  its  own  peculiar  con- 
ditions; (2)  that  the  people  of  each  city  are  assured  that 
in  the  development  of  all  fundamentally  essential  school 
programs,  their  local  officials  will  have  the  advice  and 
counsel,  and  if  necessary  the  check,  of  a  more  respon- 
sible educational  authority. 

Certification  of  Teachers.  The  state  should  have  power 
to  certificate  all  teachers;  and  such  certificate  should  be 
valid  in  any  school  district  of  the  state.  The  city  super- 
intendent should  have  the  privilege  of  adding  an  oral 
examination  as  a  further  means  of  selection. 

(i)  The  state  is  interested,  first,  to  assure  itself  that 
each  teacher  of  the  state  meets  all  requirements  set  by  the 
state.  (2)  To  make  teaching  a  profession,  to  insure  that 
capable  men  and  women  enter  and  remain  in  the  profes- 
sion, it  is  necessary  that  teachers  be  relieved  from  the 
petty  annoyances  of  taking  varied  and  ofttimes  unreliable 
sorts  of  examinations.  The  oral  examination,  amounting 
to  a  systematized  form  of  interview,  permits  local  au- 
thorities to  select  from  a  list  of  applicants  according  to 
their  special  needs. 

The  state  centralized  educational  authority  should  have 
appellate  jurisdiction  over  all  legal  questions  provision 
for  whose  settlement  is  not  definitely  placed  on  local 
officials. 

Many  disputes  that  now  disrupt  local  administrative 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT   INVOLVED  145 

organizations  could  be  settled  happily,  if  legal  procedure 
required  the  participants  to  place  their  case  before  an 
authority  capable  of  making  a  wise  decision.  Decision 
in  such  cases  becomes  a  question  of  administrative  law, 
so  that  a  judge  versed  thoroughly  in  school  law  and  its 
administration  should  prove  a  better  adjudicator  of  such 
questions  than  the  general  courts. 

The  state  commissioner  or  superintendent  should  have 
power  to  remove  local  officials  after  a  hearing;  and 
should  have  power  to  withhold  state  funds  where  fault  is 
due  to  public  negligence.  If  the  state  is  responsible  for 
compelling  cities,  if  need  be,  to  maintain  certain  specified 
minimum  standards,  then  the  state  authority  must  needs 
have  some  means  of  enforcing  such  requirements. 

The  removal  of  officials  who  are  incompetent,  wilfully 
negligent,  or  who  refuse  to  enforce  the  law,  is  one  means 
that  should  rest  with  the  state  commissioner.  Where  the 
public  opinion  of  a  community  forces  its  representatives 
to  adopt  a  school  program  that  does  not  meet  the  mini- 
mum requirements  set  by  the  state  for  cities  of  that  class, 
the  state  commissioner  should  be  empowered  to  withhold 
funds  and  to  compel  the  levying  of  a  local  tax  that  would 
meet  the  requirements  of  the  school. 

CONCLUSION 

"Public  law  is  the  body  of  rules  inherently  necessary 
to  the  organization  and  management  of  certain  services. 
Statute ....  is  the  organic  rule  of  a  service  or  body  of 
men.  An  administrative  act  is  always  an  act  made  in 

view  of  the  rule  of  service Social  evolution  is  of 

infinite  complexity  and  indefinite  duration :  law  is  no  more 
than  its  protective  armament.  The  generation  that  went 

before  believed  that  its  system  of  law was  definite 

and  final.    Let  us  not  commit  a  like  mistake.     Our  own 

system represents  but  a  moment  of  history;  and 

before  it  has  been  finallv  builded  the  keen  observer  will 


146  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

note  its  transmutation  into  a  newer  code.  The .  genera- 
tion that  is  to  come  will  be  happy  in  so  far  as  it  is  able 
in  better  fashion  than  ourselves,  to  achieve  freedom  from 
its  dogmas  and  prejudices." — Duguit,  Law  in  the  Modern 
State* 

In  America,  the  various  states  are  responsible  for  edu- 
cation within  their  borders.  The  laws  of  a  state  deter- 
mine in  a  large  measure,  the  machinery,  the  responsibility 
and  the  limitations  of  school  administration  in  its  cities. 
The  study  of  the  development  of  school  law  in  Connecti- 
cut and  Ohio  and  the  review  of  the  late  school  laws  of  the 
48  states  reveals  the  fact  that  much  of  the  present  school 
law  is  the  result  of  experience  in  days  gone  by  and  does 
not  meet  the  needs  of  our  modern  cities.  The  entire  dis- 
cussion of  this  study  has  aimed  solely  at  the  public  wel- 
fare, at  the  formulation  of  an  organic  rule  of  service  that 
will  tend  to  mould  public  opinion  and  enable  school  ad- 
ministrators to  perform  their  administrative  acts  always 
and  only  in  view  of  the  rule  of  service. 

A  review  of  the  facts  set  forth  shows  that : — 

a.  Responsibility   for   local   administration   of  schools 
was  first  vested  in  municipal  or  civil  officers  who  had  been 
chosen  primarily  for  the  performance  of  other  duties. 

b.  Gradually,  as  schools  developed,  responsibility  for 
direction  and  supervision  of  instructional  activities  was 
vested  in  officials  whose  sole  public  responsibility   was 
limited  to  the  schools. 

c.  These  lay  boards  were  given  power  to  delegate  their 
responsibility  to  small  committees  or  to  a  committee  of 
one. 

d.  This  one  official  developed  into  the  professionally 
trained  executive  known  in  every  state  as  the  city  school 
superintendent. 

•Translation  by  Laski. 


PRINCIPLES  OF  GOVERNMENT  INVOLVED  147 

e.  As  society  adds  more  and  more  responsibility  to  the 
public  school  system,  the  need  of  better  trained  and  more 
responsible  administrative  leadership  of  schools  is  recog- 
nized. 

f.  This  responsible  leadership  should     extend     to    all 
phases  of  school  activity ;  all  dual  responsibility  should  be 
eliminated. 

g.  The  laws  governing  school  administration  should  be 
formulated  to  build  up  this  responsible  leadership  and  so 
safeguard  the  public  interest. 

It,  then,  behooves  all  interested  in  public  education,  both 
laymen  and  professionally  trained  school  men  and  women 
to  lead  public  thought  in  regard  to  schools,  out  of  the 
thought  channels  cut  by  the  necessities  of  the  log  school 
house  and  the  exigencies  of  ward  politics  into  the  formu- 
lation of  a  new  set  of  rules  whereby  every  school  admin- 
istrative act  shall  be  judged  solely  by  the  service  it  ren- 
ders the  public.  These  new  rules  of  service  formulated — 
they  should  receive  the  sanction  and  protective  armament 
of  the  public  law.  The  service  rendered  by  the  schools 
of  tomorrow  will  be  directly  proportional  to  the  ability  of 
the  schools  of  today  to  achieve  freedom  from  the  limita- 
tions and  prejudices  bequeathed  from  the  schools  of  yes- 
terday. 


BRIEF  OF  A  PROPOSED  LEGAL  STATUS  FOR 
THE  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

A.      CONTROL,   OF   SCHOOLS 

Responsibility  for  local  control  and  administration  of 
city  schools  should  be  vested  in  a  superintendent  and 
board  of  education. 

B.      THE    BOARD    OF    EDUCATION 

Membership.  The  board  should  consist  of  five  mem- 
bers, chosen  from  the  city  at  large. 

Term.  Their  term  should  be  five  years,  one  member 
being  elected  or  appointed  each  year. 

Removal.  Board  members  should  be  subject  to  re- 
moval, under  specified  conditions  by : 

a.  The  "recall"  when  elected  by  popular  vote. 

b.  The  mayor  when  appointed  by  him. 

c.  The  state  commissioner  of  education  upon  wilful 
and  intended  violation  of  the  law  or  rulings  of  the 
state  board  of  education. 

Organization.  The  board  should  have  a  president  and 
vice-president  elected  from  its  membership ;  there  should 
be  no  standing  committees ;  all  business  transacted  should 
be  by  the  board  as  a  whole. 

General  powers  and  duties.  The  veto  and  approval  of 
administrative  acts  and  policies  should  be  vested  in  the 
board  of  education. 

C.      THE  SUPERINTENDENT 

Qualifications.  The  superintendent  should  have  had  ex- 
perience as  teacher  and  principal  or  supervisor  under  a 
county  or  city  superintendent ;  should  be  a  graduate  of  a 
four-year  approved  college  and  have  had  at  least  one  year 
of  graduate  training, — such  work  to  have  consisted  of 

148 


PROPOSED  LEGAL  STATUS  OP   SUPERINTENDENT     149 

courses  in  school  administration,  supervision  and  kindred 
educational  courses. 

Appointment.  He  should  be  appointed  by  the  board  of 
education  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  state  commssion- 
er  of  education. 

Term.  His  term  should  be  for  not  less  than  three  nor 
more  than  five  years.1 

Tenure.  After  his  second  appointment  to  the  same 
position,  the  superintendent's  reappointment  should  be 
automatic  unless  either  the  board  or  superintendent 
should  serve  notice  to  the  other  at  least  six  months  pre- 
ceding the  date  of  the  close  of  contracted  term  that  said 
party  proposed  to  terminate  such  relationship. 

Powers  and  duties — general.  The  initiatory  and  execu- 
tive phases  of  all  administrative  functions  should  be 
vested  in  the  superintendent  and  his  subordinate  executive 
officers.  The  superintendent  should  have  power  under 
rules  and  regulations  approved  by  the  board  to  delegate 
any  of  his  powers  and  duties  to  his  associate  or  subordi- 
nate executive  and  supervisory  officers. 

D.      POWERS   AND  DUTIES   OF  THE   BOARD   AND   SUPER- 
INTENDENT 

Appointment. — Executive  and  Supervisory  Officers. 
The  superintendent  should  nominate  to  the  board,  and 
when  the  board  approved,  should  appoint,  or  should 
appoint  subject  to  the  board's  approval: 

Teachers,-  and  other  workers  of  equivalent  training — 
The  above  provision  should  hold  with  two  exceptions: 
(i)  the  board  of  education  should  have  the  legal  right 
to  delegate  the  power  of  appointment  to  the  superintend- 
ent, subject  only  to  his  reporting  such  appointments  to  the 

'Board  members  are  elected  for  five  years.  The  superintendent's  term 
sb.  in  Id  nnt  be  l^neer  than  that  of  a  board  member.  Three  years 
IK  the  time  required  to  change  the  majority  of  the  board  mem- 
bership. 


ISO  LEGAL  STATUS  OP  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

board  at  its  regular  meetings ;  (2)  in  nominating  or  ap- 
pointing, the  superintendent  should  first  consult  and  ad- 
vise with  the  principal  or  other  executive  officers  chiefly 
responsible  for  directing  the  work  of  such  appointee. 

Other  employees.  Should  be  appointed  by  the  super- 
intendent, either  on  his  own  motion,  or  in  approval  of 
recommendations  made  by  responsible  subordinate  execu- 
tives,— such  appointments  to  be  reported  to  the  board  at 
its  next  regular  meeting. 

Transfers.  In  all  positions  of  the  same  grade  or  rank 
— to  be  made  by  the  superintendent; — transfers  to  posi- 
tions of  different  grade  or  rank  to  be  subject  to  the  rules 
governing  original  appointments. 

Promotion.  To  higher  positions  under  same  rules  as 
for  original  appointment.  To  higher  salary  schedules, 
under  such  rules  controlling  salary  schedule  and  budget 
as  had  been  adopted  by  the  board  upon  the  written  re- 
commendations of  the  superintendent. 

Dismissal.  For  officers  and  teachers  power  of  dismis- 
sal should  be  vested  in  the  board.  All  charges  should 
come  before  the  board  through  the  superintendent  and  in 
writing,  accompanied  by  the  latter's  recommendations. 
In  case  of  disagreement  between  board  and  superintend- 
ent, the  final  power  of  decision  should  rest  with  the  state 
commissioner  of  education. 

Budget.  The  superintendent,  with  the  advice  and  as- 
sistance of  his  subordinate,  should  be  responsible  for  pre- 
paring the  budget,  submitting  it  to  the  board  for  approval, 
and  for  formulating  any  revisions  that  the  board  might 
find  necessary. 

Buildings  and  Grounds.  Purchase  and  sale  of  build- 
ings and  grounds  should  be  negotiated  by  the  superin- 
tendent in  person  or  through  his  assistant  superintendent 


PROPOSED   LEGAL   STATUS  OF   SUPERINTENDENT      1$1 

in  charge  of  business  affairs,  subject  to  the  advice  and 
approval  of  the  board. 

Maintenance  repairs  should  be  made  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  superintendent  or  his  assistant  superintendent 
in  charge  of  business  affairs. 

Repairs  requiring  capital  outlay  should  be  made  upon 
the  written  recommendations  of  the  superintendent  sub- 
ject to  the  approval  of  the  board. 

The  superintendent  should  be  responsible  for  having 
drawn  up  under  his  direction  all  plans  for  new  con- 
struction, such  plans  to  be  subject  to  the  approval  of  the 
board  and  of  the  state  commissioner  of  education. 

The  superintendent  either  in  his  own  person  or  through 
his  assistant  superintendent  in  charge  of  business  affairs 
should  be  responsible  for  supervision  of  new  construction. 

Attendance.  The  superintendent  should  be  respon- 
sible for  directing  a  continuous  census,  and  for  enforcing 
the  compulsory  attendance  and  child  labor  laws;  the 
board  of  education  should  be  responsible  for  providing 
such  help  and  assistance  as  is  needed  for  carrying  on 
these  duties. 

Rules  and  regulations  governing  routine  matters  should 
be  determined  by  the  superintendent  by  and  with  the  ad- 
vice and  assistance  of  his  associates. 

New  policies  involving  capital  outlay  or  radical  change 
of  school  procedure  should  be  prepared  by  the  superin- 
tendent with  the  advice  and  assistance  of  his  associates, 
subject  to  the  approval  of  -the  board  of  education. 

Curricula.  The  various  curricula  including  the  sub- 
jects to  be  taught  in  each,  the  time  to  be  allotted,  and  the 
credit  to  be  given,  should  be  determined  by  the  superin- 
tendent with  the  advice  of  his  associates,  subject  to  the 
advice  and  approval  of  the  board  of  education  and  the 
approval  of  the  state  commissioner  of  education. 


152  LEGAL  STATUS  OP  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

The  content  of  each  subject  should  be  determined  by 
teachers  and  supervisory  officers  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  superintendent. 

Textbooks  and  Supplies.  Textbooks  and  instructional 
supplies  should  be  chosen  by  the  superintendent  with  the 
advice  and  assistance  of  teachers  and  supervisory  officers. 

All  other  supplies  should  be  chosen  by  the  assistant 
superintendent  in  charge  of  business  affairs,  with  the  ad- 
vice and  assistance  of  his  subordinates,  and  subject  to 
the  approval  of  the  superintendent. 

Direction  and  supervision.  Subject  to  rules  and  regu- 
lations prepared  and  submitted  by  the  superintendent  and 
approved  by  the  board,  the  superintendent  should  be  re- 
sponsible in  person  or  through  his  assistant  executive  and 
supervisory  officers  for  the  direction  and  supervision  of: 

a.  Health  work  in  the  schools. 

b.  Civic  center  or  recreational  and  social  activities. 

c.  Evening  and  continuation  schools. 

d.  Classroom  instruction. 

e.  Research  work. 

E.      RELATION  OF  BOARD  AND  SUPERINTENDENT  TO  EXECU- 
TIVE AND  SUPERVISORY   OFFICERS,  TEACHERS 
AND  OTHER  SCHOOL  EMPLOYEES 

Unified  executive  control.  Executive  control  of  all 
school  affairs,  e.  g.,  secretarial,  business,  health,  recrea- 
tional, research  and  instructional  activities,  should  be 
vested  in  the  superintendent.  There  should  be  NO  dual 
executive  authority. 

The  superintendent's  Council.  The  council  should 
consist  of  such  representatives  from  supervisory,  teach- 
ing and  other  employee  groups,  as  might  be  determined 
by  those  groups  with  the  approval  of  the  superintendent 
and  board  of  education.  The  members  of  the  council,  not 


PROPOSED   LEGAL    STATUS   OF    SUPERINTENDENT      153 

ex-officio,  should  be  selected  from  the  respective  groups 
by  the  majority  vote  of  those  groups. 

The  superintendent  should  advise  with  this  council 
in  determining  all  questions  of  policy,  but  the  ac- 
tion of  the  council  should  be  advisory  only,  and  in  no  way 
compulsory  as  to  the  superintendent's  decision. 

The  minutes  of  the  meetings  of  the  council  should  be 
recorded  and  should  be  open  to  all  school  officers,  teach- 
ers, other  employees,  and  board  of  education. 

Concerning  questions  going  before  the  board  of  educa- 
tion both  the  majority  and  minority  recommendations  of 
the  council  should  go  to  the  board,  when  such  majority 
or  minority  so  desire. 

F.  RELATIONSHIP  OF  BOARD  AND  SUPERINTENDENT  TO 

OTHER    MUNICIPAL    OFFICERS 

Within  reasonable  tax  limits  fixed  by  legislative  enact- 
ment, the  board  of  education  and  superintendent  should 
have  complete  control  of  the  school  budget  and  fixing  of 
the  tax  rate. 

New  building  programs  or  extensions  of  school  service 
requiring  a  tax  rate  in  excess  of  the  limits  fixed  by  law 
should  be  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  mayor  or  com- 
mission only  in  those  cities  where  the  board  of  education 
is  appointed  by  said  mayor  or  commission. 

G.  RELATION     OF    BOARD    AND    SUPERINTENDENT    TO 

THE  PUBLIC 

All  board  meetings,  regular  or  special,  should  be  open 
to  the  public.    Minutes  of  the  board  should  be  kept  on  file 
in  the  superintendent's  office  and  open  to  the  public. 
All  official  proceedings  of  the  board  should  be  published' 
Where  the  board  of  education  is  elected  by  popular  vote 
the  board  and  superintendent  should  have  full  responsi- 
bility for  the    budget    within    limits    fixed    by    statute. 
Amounts  in  excess  of  these  limits  required  for  extensions 


154  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

of  school  plant  of  service  should  be  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  public  at  a  regular  or  special  election. 

The  proposed  budget,  each  year,  should  be  printed  and 
distributed  to  all  voters  and  taxpayers,  and  a  public  hear- 
ing should  be  held  by  the  superintendent  and  board. 

Reports.  The  superintendent  and  board  should  keep 
the  pu'blic  thoroughly  informed  as  to  the  policies  of  the 
school,  its  conditions,  needs  and  progress. 

Petitions.  A  petition  signed  by  ten  (10)  per  cent,  of 
the  legal  voters  of  the  city  should  be  sufficient  to  require 
the  superintendent  and  the  board  to  take  action  on  the 
subject  of  the  petition. 

H.      RELATIONSHIP    OF    BOARD    AND    SUPERINTENDENT    TO 
CENTRALIZED   STATE    EDUCATIONAL    AUTHORITY 

It  should  be  the  duty  of  superintendent  and  board  to 
enforce  the  state  school  laws  and  the  rules  and  regulations 
of  state  educational  authorities  which  have  the  force  of 
law. 

The  state  authority  should  have  the  right  to  prescribe 
minimum  essentials  for  the  state  at  large  or  for  cities  or 
schools  of  the  same  class  or  type:  but  in  every  case  the 
centralized  state  authority  should  encourage  local  initia- 
tive, and  should  exercise  its  power  primarily  through  veto 
or  approval  of  local  plans. 

The  board  and  superintendent  should  have  complete 
control  of  the  city  schools  subject  to  the  state  laws,  and 
rulings  of  the  state  commissioner  and  board  of  education 
having  the  force  of  law. 


APPENDIX 

CODE  SHOWING  LEGAL  RESPONSIBILITY  FOR 

THE  EXERCISE  OF  THE  FUNCTIONS  OF 

CITY  SCHOOL  ADMINISTRATION 

(As  stated  in  the  laws  of  the  48  states  of  the  Union). 
See  Charts  A  and  B  in  pocket  in  back  of  book. 

1.  The  exercise  of  the  function  is  delegated  solely  to  the 
board  of  education. 

2.  Initiative  is  permitted  to  or  required  of  the  superin- 
tendent; but  the  board  of  education  is  free  to  act  in- 
dependently of  his  advice. 

3.  Initiative  is  required  of  the  superintendent ;  the  board 
of  education  can  act  only  on  the  superintendent's  re- 
commendation. 

4.  The  exercise  of  the  function  is  delegated  solely  to  the 
superintendent. 

ip,  2p,  3p,  or  4p — Provision  I,  2,  3,  or  4  above,  subject 
to  the  approval  of  the  people. 

im,  2m,  3m,  or  4m — Provision  i,  2,  3,  or  4  above,  sub- 
ject to  the  approval  of  some  phase  of  the  municipal 
government. 

ic,  2c,  3c,  or  4c — Provision  i,  2,  3,  or  4  above,  subject 
to  the  approval  of  county  authorities. 

is,  2s,  3s,  or  45 — Provision  i,  2,  3,  or  4  above,  subject  to 
the  approval  of  the  state  authorities. 

it,  2t,  3t,  or  4t — Provision  i,  2,  3,  or  4  above,  but  also 
providing  for  participation  by  teachers  in  the  exer- 
cise of  the  function. 

C.  The  exercise  of  the  function  is  delegated  solely  to 
the  county  authorities. 

5.  The  exercise  of  the  function  is  delegated  solely  to 

state  authorities. 
T.     The  exercise  of  the  function  is  delegated  solely  to  the 

teachers. 

I1.     Initiative  is  granted  to  the  public. 

155 


CODE  FOR  TABULATING  FORM  NO.  i 
See  Tables  C  and  D  in  pocket  in  back  of  book. 

o.     Blank.    No  answer. 

*i.  Supt.  is  solely  responsible;  board  of  education  has 
no  responsibility. 

2.  Supt.  initiates,  executes,  subject  to  board's  approval 

after  execution. 

3.  Supt.  initiates,  executes,  subject  to  board's  approval 

before  execution. 

4.  Supt.  initiates  and  approves;  board  executes. 

5.  Supt.  initiates ;  board  executes,  or  approves  and  ex- 

ecutes. 

6.  Supt.  initiates;  board  approves  before  execution — 

no  provision  for  execution. 

7.  Supt.  initiates;  board  approves  after  execution — no 

provision  for  execution. 

8.  Supt.  executes;  board  approves  before  execution — 

no  provision  for  initiation. 

9.  Supt.  executes;  board  approves  after  execution — 

no  provision  for  initiation. 

10.  Supt.  initiates — no  provision  for  approval  or  exe- 
cution. 

*ii.  Board  is  solely  responsible;  supt.  has  no  responsi- 
bility. 

12.  Board  initiates  and  approves;  supt.  executes. 

13.  Board  initiates  and  executes;  supt.  approves. 

14.  Board  initiates ;  supt.  approves  and  executes. 


•Includes  those  cases  where  only  mark  after  a  function  was  placed  In 

"execute"  column. 

N.  B. — When  both  columns  for  approval  by  board  were  checked,  credit 
was  given  for  "approval  before  execution"  only. 


156 


APPENDIX  157 

15.  Board   initiates;   supt.  approves — no  provision   for 

execution. 

16.  Board  executes;  supt.  approves — no  provision  for 

initiation. 

17.  Board  initiates — no  provision  for  execution  or  ap- 

proval. 

18.  Teachers  initiate;  supt.  approves  or  approves  and 

executes;  board  has  no  responsibility. 

19.  Teachers  initiate;  supt.  and  board  approve;  supt. 

executes   (or  execution  blank). 

20.  Board  and  supt.  initiate ;  supt.  approves ;  board  exe- 

cutes. 

21.  Board  and  supt.  initiate;  board  approves;  supt.  ex- 

ecutes. 

22.  Board  and  supt.  initiate;  board  executes — no  pro- 

vision for  approval. 

23.  Board  and  supt.  initiate:  supt.  executes — no  provi- 

sion for  approval. 

24.  Board  and  supt.  approve — no  provision  for  initia- 

tion or  execution. 

25.  Miscellaneous. 

a — Teachers  may  initiate. 
b — Teachers  may  participate, 
ab — Teachers  may  initiate  and  participate. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  of  CITY  SCHOOL  ADMIN- 
ISTRATION 

Cousin.    Public  Instruction  in  Prussia,  1835. 
(Translated  by  Sarah  Austin) 

Hoyt  and  Ford.  John  D.  Pierce.  A  Study  of  Educa- 
tion in  the  North  West,  1905. 

Barnard.     The  Old  Hartford  Grammar  School. 

Mead.  The  Development  of  Free  Schools  in  the  United 
States. 

Connecticut  Common  School  Laws,  1841,  1843,  1846, 
1860,  1868,  1879,  1886,  1896,  1904,  1910,  1912. 

Connecticut,  Fourth  Annual  Report  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Board  of  Commissioners,  1842. 

Common  School  System  of  Connecticut.  Reprint  from 
North  American  Review,  April,  1842. 

Circular  concerning  Alterations  in  the  School  Laws,  to 
School  Visitors  and  Others.  New  Haven,  1856. 

Prize  Essay  on  the  necessity  and  means  of  improving  the 
common  schools  of  Connecticut. 

The  Consolidation  of  School  Districts.  •  A  tract  for  the 
times  in  Connecticut.  Educational  Tracts,  No.  i. 

Hinsdale,  M.  L.  Legislative  History  of  the  Public  School 
System  of  Ohio,  1902.  Washington,  Government 
Printing  Office. 

Ohio  School  Laws,  1865,  1880,  1900,  1904,  1915. 

Advance  Sheets  of  Ohio  School  Laws,  1919. 

Ohio,  1854.  Annual  Report,  State  Commissioner  of  Com- 
mon Schools. 

158 


J'.IBUOGRAPHY 


159 


Cleveland,  Board  of  Education,  Annual  Report  of, 
1855-56. 

Cleveland,  Board  of  Education,  Annual  Report  of, 
1868-69. 

Freese,  Andrew,  Early  History  of  the  Cleveland  Public 
Schools,  1876. 

Suzzallo.  The  Rise  of  Local  Supervision  in  Massa- 
chusetts. 


STATIC  SCHOOL  LAWS 


Alabama  1919 
Arizona  1919 
Arkansas    1914 
California  1915 
Colorado  1917 
Connecticut  1916 
Delaware  1919 
Florida   1915 
Georgia  1919 
Idaho  1917 
Illinois  1919 
Indiana  1917 
Iowa  1919 
Kansas  1917 
Kentucky  1918 
Louisiana  1916 
Maine  1917 
Maryland  1918 
Massachusetts  1919 
Michigan  1917 
Minnesota  1915 
Mississippi   1918 
Missouri  1917 
Montana  1917 


Nebraska  1919 
Nevada  1919 
New  Hampshire  1919 
New  Jersey  1918 
New  Mexico  1915 
New  York  1918 
North  Carolina  1917 
North  Dakota  1915 
Ohio  1915 
Oklahoma  1919 
Oregon  1919 
Pennsylvania  1919 
Rhode  Island  1918 
South  Carolina  1918 
South  Dakota  1918 
Tennessee  1917 
Texas  1917 
Utah   1919 
Vermont   1918 
Virginia  1915 
Washington  1917 
West  Virginia  1919 
Wisconsin  1919 
Wyoming  1910 


l6o  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 
CITY  CODES  AND  SPECIAL  CHARTERS 

Alhambra,  California,  Charter    1915. 

Ashtabula,  Ohio,  Charter  1914. 

Atlanta,  Georgia.  The  Charter  and  Ordinances  of  the  City 

of  Atlanta,  1910. 

Baltimore,  Maryland.  Charter  of,  Revised  Edition  1915. 
Berkeley,  California.     Charter  of  the  city  of,  1909. 
Berkeley,  California.    General  Ordinances  of  the  City  of, 

1918. 

Birmingham,  Alabama.    Code  of  the  City  of,  1917. 
Buffalo,  New  York.    Charter  of  the  City  of,  1916. 
Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa.     Commission  Plan  of  Government 

of  City  of  1908-10. 
Dallas,  Texas.     Charter  of  the  City  of,  1907.  (Including 

amendments  of  1909). 
Denver,  Colorado.     Charter  of  the  City  and  County  of, 

1914. 
Greensboro,   North  Carolina.     Charter  of  the   City  of, 

1912. 

Houston,  Texas.     Charter  and  Revised  Code  of  Ordi- 
nances of  City  of,  1914. 

Lincoln,  Nebraska.    Charter  of  the  City  of,  1917. 
Los  Angeles,  California.     Charter  of  the  City  of,  1913. 
Milwaukee,  Wisconsin.    Code  1914.    Supplement  1916. 
Minneapolis,  Minnesota.     The  Charter  of  the  City  of, 

1913.     (Prepared  and  Proposed.) 
Nashville,  Tennessee.    Charter  of  City  of,  1909. 
New  Haven,  Connecticut.     Charter  and  Ordinances  of 

City  of,  1914. 
Portland,  Oregon.     The  Charter  of  the  City  of,  1913, 

revised    1914. 
Providence,  Rhode  Island.    Charter  and  Special  Laws  of 

the  City  of,  1916. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  l6l 

Providence,  Rhode  Island.     Ordinances  of  the  City  of, 

1912,  1914. 

Richmond,  Virginia.     City  Code  and  Charter,  1910. 
Rutland,  Vermont.     Charter  of  the  City  of,  1915. 
San    Francisco,    California.     Charter   of   the    City   and 

County  of,  (as  amended  in  1903,  1907,  1911). 
Seattle,  Washington.     Charter  as  amended  1900-1915. 
Tacoma,  Washington  —  Charter  and  General  Ordinances, 


Toledo,  Ohio.    Charter  1914. 

Toledo,  Ohio.     The  Toledo  Code  of  1919  (containing 

charter  as  amended  to  November  4,  1919). 
Waco,  Texas.    Charter  of  the  City  of  Waco.    1914. 

STATUTES 

Missouri,  Revised  Statutes,  1909.    Art.  XIII. 

Laws  191.1,  1915,  1917,  1919. 
Maryland,  Bagby,  Maryland  Code,  1914. 

Laws  of  Maryland,  1916,  1918. 
Oklahoma,  Bunn,  Revised  Laws  1910. 

Supplement  to  Revised  Laws  of  1910,  1918. 
Session  Laws  1919. 

Texas,  Vernon  Sayles'  Civil  Statutes,  1914. 
Georgia,  Park's  Annotated  Code  of  1914  . 

Session  Laws  1870  (Acts  and  Resolutions  of  the 

General  Association). 
Session  Laws  1897. 
Session  Laws  1916,  1918. 

Minnesota,  Tiffany,  General  Statutes,  1913-1917. 
Session  Laws,  1919. 

LAW   AND  GOVERNMENT  IN   CITY  AND  STATE 

Bradford,  E.  S.     Commission  Government  in  American 

Cities. 
Bryce.     The  American  Commonwealth. 


l62   LEGAL  STATUS  OF  CITY  SCHOOL  SUPERINTENDENT 

Duguit.  Law  in  the  Modern  State.  (Translation  by 
Laski  and  Laski.) 

McBain,  Howard  Lee.  The  Law  and  the  Practice  of 
Municipal  Home  Rule. 

McBain.  The  Delegation  of  Legislative  Powers  to  Cities. 
Political  Science  Quarterly,  XXXII,  pp.  276-391. 

Munro.     Government  of  American  Cities. 

Massachusetts.  Bulletins  for  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention, 1917-1918.  Vols.  I-II. 

ADMINISTRATION  OF  SCHOOLS  IN  CITIES 

Cubberly,  Public  Education  in  the  United  States,  1919. 

Cubberly,  The  History  of  Education;  Educational  Prac- 
tice and  Progress  Considered  as  a  Phase  of  the 
Development  and  Spread  of  Western  Civilisation, 
1920. 

Cubberly  and  Others.  School  Organisation  and  Admin- 
istration, 1917. 

Engelhardt,  A  School  Building  Program  for  Cities,  1918. 

Evenden,  Teachers'  Salaries  and  Salary  Schedules  in  the 
United  States,  1918-1919. 

Judd  and  Others,  Survey  of  the  St.  Louis  Public  Schools, 
Part  i ;  Organisation  and  Administration  1918. 

Ortman,  Teachers'  Councils,  1921. 

Neale,  School  Reports  in  American  Cities,  1921. 

Strayer  and  Bachman,  The  Gary  Public  Schools;  Organ- 
isation and  Administration,  1918. 

Strayer  and  Others.  Report  of  a  Survey  of  the  School 
System  of  St.  Paul,  Minnesota,  1917. 

Theisen,  The  City  Superintendent  and  the  Board  of  Edu- 
cation, 1917. 


This  book  is  DUE  on  the 
date  stamped  below. 


MN  4      1963 

AUGl 


EMINGTON  RAND  INC.  2O 


213         (533) 


Education 
Library 

LB 
2819 
M83  1 


A     001  036 845     4 


I 


UCLA-ED/PSYCH  Library 

LB  2819  M83I 


